? Tesla Truck Kinda Edgy Tho - Tesla releases oddly polygonal pickup truck

[Drak3]

14 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

Found one in mud:

And? The car wasn’t dug in at any point, and the mud was a fairly thin layer. All you’ve shown me is a Tesla driving on an ever so slightly slippery dirt road. Not an EV going off road.

 

Nor is snow driving the same as mud. Snow compacts under the tire and gives it something more solid to grab on to.

20 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

Does not mean it's "useless" or "stupid"

Didn’t say either of those things, don’t put words in my mouth.

20 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

gonna get stuck in the mud"

Every vehicle will get stuck. ICE off roaders are very likely better at getting unstuck.

[mr moose]

10 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

EV motors should last longer and be more reliable. That's the only reason Tesla is still able to sell cars. Issue is that Pure EVs have operation windows like cellphones.

What do you mean by "operation windows by cellphone"?

 

10 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

It's the nature of being Battery/Electric system. And if it's been 18% in 8 years (so about 2% per annum), then the lithium-ion tech is at the end of its useful expansion. If it needs 300%, it's never getting there.

See my edit,  I miss quoted the figure is not 18% over 8 years it is an average of 18% every year for 8 years (one year improved by 35% alone) and still going down.  And that is before we consider any other new developments in battery tech.   The most expensive part of lithium batteries is the lithium, not the manufacturing.    There is no reason to assume it will never get there, if we look at history there is more reason to assume we will not only get there but likely find alternatives at the same time.
 People said there was no way you could shrink transistors beyond basic ttl chips now look how small they can be made.  Never say never when it comes to technology.  

10 hours ago, Taf the Ghost said:

At least as Lithium-Ion. Much like Fusion Power, you never know exactly what could come out if someone really figures something out. (Also, Lithium-Ion tech will get progressively more expensive to see improvements. Nature of the R&D Beast.)

 

"Plug-in Hybrids" never took off because mostly of terrible marketing and the fact most of this stuff spun during the "We're all going bankrupt!" era. Not a lot of long-term planning going on. GM never made the type of car where their Series Hybrid tech would have really worked in the early generations. They needed a new sub-marque within Cadillac and they needed to roll out 100k-130k USD luxury car with the tech. They're slowly starting to offer the proper type of vehicles with the tech, but it's going to be a while.  Tesla at least got that you needed the "Party Mode" setting to really turn the 0-60 time up, even if you're going to burn through a set of the normal tires in about 20 minutes using them.

 

It's just one of those products that is gaining traction slowly,  They are still being developed and made and we are starting to see a lot more on the roads. 

 

 

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

What do you mean by "operation windows by cellphone"?

My assumption is that he means the way people use an EV vs an ICE - eg: fueling up once a week or two at some third party location ("gas station") before returning the vehicle home.

 

This is in large part why a lot of people have range anxiety. They don't understand the paradigm shift involved with an EV - they're worried about charging stations and infrastructure, when most of them won't need them. Your home is your infrastructure. You top up every night, and during the day, you maybe use 10-30% of the charge. So you're hardly ever charging from empty to full - instead, you're charging maybe 15-20% each night.

 

A lot of people find it hard to understand that with an EV, every morning you have a "full tank", so to speak. And because they don't understand that, they keep thinking of it in terms of "Oh, I've used this EV for a week now and my battery is low, so I'll have to go to a station to charge up".

 

And sure, there may be people like that - especially those who don't have a location where they can install a charger. But those aren't going to be the primary buyers an EV for a while anyway.

 

With the current technology and infrastructure, no, an EV isn't for everyone. But a hell of a lot of people could switch to one with zero drawbacks. Far fewer people drive long distances regularly than is made out to be.

 

Same with truck drivers. Far fewer truck owners actually use their truck like a Farmer does. Most of them are just regular people who wanted a big ass truck because 'Murica and they could get one. Most truck owners aren't towing 5th wheels or going to construction sites or hauling cattle or even using a toolbox (which they wouldn't need anyway, with the Cybertruck, as it has built-in tool storage).

 

Personally I think there are only really two valid (semi valid) criticisms of the Cybertruck:

1. Sidewalls on the bed are too high - fair enough.

2. Looks - which is only semi valid because looks are subjective. And frankly, solving problem #1 would also go a long way to solving problem #2 (see the Tweet I quoted above, which just photoshopped the sidewalls to have a normal slope - it looks fucking awesome like that).

[amdorintel]

5 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

This is in large part why a lot of people have range anxiety. They don't understand the paradigm shift involved with an EV

yes, its very very hard to change habits of people. thats why they love their large, heavy, gas gusseting vehicles. at any moment they can decide to go on a 1000 mile trip and not have to worry about gas, to a large extent. thats why too, people have been stranded in remote areas because they rely on their gps instead of common sense.

[Drak3]

@dalekphalmWhen people say that infrastructure can't support mass EV use, they mean that the electric grid isn't being fed enough energy to charge that many EVs. If you charge every night, and just about everyone else does too, a huge amount of power is being drawn.

 

Whereas only refilling when needed helps alleviate that issue (and other fuel sources circumvent entirely).

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, amdorintel said:

yes, its very very hard to change habits of people. thats why they love their large, heavy, gas gusseting vehicles. at any moment they can decide to go on a 1000 mile trip and not have to worry about gas, to a large extent. thats why too, people have been stranded in remote areas because they rely on their gps instead of common sense.

Indeed - and even in the case of people who, say, once a year travel to the other side of the country to visit family on holiday, an EV can still be their daily driver. With the fuel savings alone over a year, all they need to do is rent a car during that once-a-year road trip (or, just plan ahead and use the existing charging network, which is only getting better every year).

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

@dalekphalmWhen people say that infrastructure can't support mass EV use, they mean that the electric grid isn't being fed enough energy to charge that many EVs. If you charge every night, and just about everyone else does too, a huge amount of power is being drawn.

 

Whereas only refilling when needed helps alleviate that issue (and other fuel sources circumvent entirely).

Overnight is typically when demand is at the lowest - hence why any place that does time-of-use billing will give you the cheapest rates overnight. That alone will go a long way to help alleviate any grid issues.

 

But besides that, any Grid worth it's salt is already investing in long term strategies to allow expanded grid load for EV's. And we're talking a small percentage of EV owners being added every year.

 

Yes that will accelerate over time, but electrical utilities have decades to get to where they need to be. No one is expecting all ICE owners to just buy an EV overnight. It'll be a slow (but increasingly faster over time) transition.

 

It might be a problem for some grids, especially ones that are already in shambles and in dire need of an upgrade. But plenty of grids are already planning for the switch to EV's.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

@dalekphalmWhen people say that infrastructure can't support mass EV use, they mean that the electric grid isn't being fed enough energy to charge that many EVs. If you charge every night, and just about everyone else does too, a huge amount of power is being drawn.

 

Whereas only refilling when needed helps alleviate that issue (and other fuel sources circumvent entirely).

If that was a problem you would have black outs during the day very frequently.  Off peak loads are so small power companies almost half their tariffs to encourage people to use more to help load balance the system. 

[EarthWormJM2]

Here's a good thorough honest review comparing it to the real-world:

 

 

[dalekphalm]

41 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If that was a problem you would have black outs during the day very frequently.  Off peak loads are so small power companies almost half their tariffs to encourage people to use more to help load balance the system. 

Agreed.

 

Let's take Ontario as an example, a place that has fairly high rates.

 

On-peak rates: 7 AM to 11 AM and 5 PM to 7 PM - 20.8c per kWh

Off-peak rates: 7 PM to 7 AM (plus all day weekends and holidays) - 10.1c per kWh

 

So it's actually less than half the price to charge an EV overnight than it is during the day.

 

I can even check almost live power consumption data province wide through the IESO website, and you can see the massive drop every day. The peak for last Friday was a little over 18 MW 18,000 MW of power used in Ontario. The low-point for Friday night (technically Saturday morning) was around 13 MW 13,000.

 

That's a (see edit, much more) massive 5 MW 5,000 MW difference during overnight. If we assume you're charging with a Level 2 charger, at home, using a standard 240V 30A circuit ("dryer" outlet) - it can peak at 7200 W (7.2 KW).

 

That means an additional 700 700,000 EV's can be added to the grid right this moment and charge overnight without affecting peak grid usage.

 

Massive edit: Oh shit, my grid numbers were too low by 1000

[dalekphalm]

10 minutes ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

Here's a good thorough honest review comparing it to the real-world:

 

 

I love watching Doug DeMuro, so I'll definitely have to watch that video.

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Agreed.

 

Let's take Ontario as an example, a place that has fairly high rates.

 

On-peak rates: 7 AM to 11 AM and 5 PM to 7 PM - 20.8c per kWh

Off-peak rates: 7 PM to 7 AM (plus all day weekends and holidays) - 10.1c per kWh

 

So it's actually less than half the price to charge an EV overnight than it is during the day.

 

I can even check almost live power consumption data province wide through the IESO website, and you can see the massive drop every day. The peak for last Friday was a little over 18 MW of power used in Ontario. The low-point for Friday night (technically Saturday morning) was around 13 MW.

 

That's a massive 5 MW difference during overnight. If we assume you're charging with a Level 2 charger, at home, using a standard 240V 30A circuit ("dryer" outlet) - it can peak at 7200 W (7.2 KW).

 

That means an additional 700 EV's can be added to the grid right this moment and charge overnight without affecting peak grid usage.

And when domestic use of fuel drops the refineries will reduce capacity freeing up power.  So yes I can see them needing to upgrade the infrastructure for everyone to be doing it, but they aren't going to have to do much upgrading for that.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

3 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

Re: wrong on everything:

perhaps in your area.  I know a great deal about how the electrical in my house works.  I assure you that where I live that is exactly how it is done.  I can provide pictures and meter readings if necessary.  Now in YOUR area it may be different.  My neighborhood is exceptionally primitive.  I was providing myself as a low end scenario.  1932 technology.  It may be much better elsewhere.  The point I was trying to make and apparently failed at was that even though my house uses tech from near 100 years ago I can still do phase 2 charging.  This “only a few places can charge electric vehicles” thing is demonstrably bogus.

I worked 32 years for a major AZ electric (and irrigation) utility so I think I know something about electric transmission and distribution. What I wrote will apply to the vast majority of the U.S. unless your service provider is in some really primitive, backwater location miles from civilization. Unless you aren't in the U.S., I can pretty much guarantee you do not have a 2 phase service unless your service area doesn't comply with the NEC (and probably not even then). Even as primitive as the power utilities are in CA, they aren't as primitive as you are describing.

[dalekphalm]

12 minutes ago, mr moose said:

And when domestic use of fuel drops the refineries will reduce capacity freeing up power.  So yes I can see them needing to upgrade the infrastructure for everyone to be doing it, but they aren't going to have to do much upgrading for that.

Indeed - industrial/commercial usage makes up the vast majority of grid usage.

 

Also, see my edit - my Grid Capacity numbers for Ontario were off by an order of magnitude (5,000 MW of spare capacity overnight instead of 5 MW) - so that means with the existing peak vs dip gap in Ontario, you could charge around 700,000 EV's during that dip without affecting total grid capacity.

 

And that's aside from the fact that Ontario's installed grid capacity actually far exceed's our current usage (around 19 or 20,000 MW at peak, worst case) - the current installed grid capacity is: 37 MW - so Ontario actually has room to nearly double it's grid usage before running into grid problems.

 

Now - granted, Ontario isn't some backwater US state (no offense...) with a grid that hasn't been upgraded in 50 years. When the previous government took control, they spent billions in the early 2000's upgrading the grid (Anyone remember the famous North East blackout of 2003?) to modern standards with spare capacity to ensure that nothing like that blackout could ever happen in - or affect - Ontario again.

 

Now, with that in mind, 10,000 MW of that capacity is Natural Gas and Oil (mostly the former) - which is used as a grid peak load balance. Most of our baseload is Nuclear (13,000 MW) - but as anyone who knows about Nuclear can attest, they suck at grid load balancing.

[EarthWormJM2]

4 hours ago, Drak3 said:

@EarthWormJM2 Are you going to keep rehashing early parts of arguments?

 

I need to know so I can expect a higher number of nothingburger notifications.

Sorry I am catching up from the weekend and this is a long thread, it is Monday after all...

 

...Gotta love rude millennials.

[derr12]

What Doug DeMuro is missing here is the cost of ownership for light duty and especially heavy duty trucks over their lifetimes. 

Diesel engines cost a lot to maintain, traditional engine vehicle drivetrains too. i wonder how that all adds up?

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, derr12 said:

What Doug DeMuro is missing here is the cost of ownership for light duty and especially heavy duty trucks over their lifetimes. 

Diesel engines cost a lot to maintain, traditional engine vehicle drivetrains too. i wonder how that all adds up?

Definitely an interesting point to consider - I think we need to take a lot of the early considerations of the Cybertruck with a grain of salt until the production version is revealed and reviewed.

[Lathlaer]

4 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Definitely an interesting point to consider - I think we need to take a lot of the early considerations of the Cybertruck with a grain of salt until the production version is revealed and reviewed.

Yeah, a lower cost of usage could pull the Cybertruck back into the light duty pickup category despite higher initial price (and then the parameters again become impressive).

[Commodus]

3 hours ago, EarthWormJM2 said:

Here's a good thorough honest review comparing it to the real-world:

 

 

A useful clip, but it's not a review unless he's been secretly driving it.

 

(Sorry, this is just a reflection of my beef with people calling everything a "review" when it's really just an opinion/hands-on/news piece.)

[JZStudios]

On 11/22/2019 at 9:48 AM, Bombastinator said:

There’s futuristic and retro futuristic. The view of the future that was had at an earlier time.  Like steampunk.  There’s a reason they call car body design “styling”.  The classic example is the 57’ Chevy bel aire.  The big powerful fast things of the time were prop fighter planes so they took bits of the way prop fighter planes were shaped and kind of mushed them into a car shape.  Cars looked like this once upon a time because the biggest baddest thing was the sr71 and the stealth fighter.

 I do not think it’s a final body design.  It may be a rough shape but it’s unstyled.  Total lack of bodylines for one thing.  It might wind up looking a lot like a Cadillac.

I'd like to see a quote on how exactly the Bel Air was inspired prop planes. I see zero resemblance. And cars never looked like this, outside of Sci-Fi movies because the future was harsh angles and Brutalism. I've seen a SR71, and it's recon drone in person, they look nothing like this or anything DMC, Blade Runner, or Lotus ever made. Fun fact, this thing looks about as aerodynamic as a brick with completely flat panels, and there's not a single flat panel anywhere on the SR-71.

 

I'm just completely baffled as to why it needs to be 1/2" steel with bulletproof glass for a presumably civilian vehicle.

 

And after doing a bit of Googling, it turns out that the truck is 1/8" (3mm) stainless based off of... Elon's whim I guess, because it's said to be the same on the SpaceX rockets. The reason its so god forsaken ugly is money. Tesla has serious issues with quality control on paint, so it has none. Standard pressing practice doesn't work very well on stainless steel that thick, so it's laser cut in certain areas and literally folded into shape.

According to Wikipeda, according to Tesla it's weighing in at somewhere around 6000 pounds, which is fucking ludicrous. The fact that the steel is actually so thin tells me it's not all that bulletproof, it might (and probably will) stop 9mm pistol rounds, but any rifle will rip right through it, so it doesn't really buy into being an APC. Seems like Tesla was getting too many complaints about how easily the aluminum dents, so boom, problem solved.

On 11/22/2019 at 11:14 AM, Drak3 said:

The Raptor is a different animal. That truck, along side the RAM counterparts (Rebel and TRX) and Tacoma, are designed more for fun. The Raptor also wasn't made to be a fast truck on the track, it's a nimble off roader.

 

For fast stock track trucks ,you want to look at the Ford SVT Lightning and RAM SRT-10 (still one of the fastest stock trucks), both of which have been discontinued since '04.

The Raptor is more designed to be an off road racer, which this vehicle will not be.

[Drak3]

18 minutes ago, JZStudios said:

The Raptor is more designed to be an off road racer,

Hence why I called it a nimble off roader.

[Bombastinator]

5 hours ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

I worked 32 years for a major AZ electric (and irrigation) utility so I think I know something about electric transmission and distribution. What I wrote will apply to the vast majority of the U.S. unless your service provider is in some really primitive, backwater location miles from civilization. Unless you aren't in the U.S., I can pretty much guarantee you do not have a 2 phase service unless your service area doesn't comply with the NEC (and probably not even then). Even as primitive as the power utilities are in CA, they aren't as primitive as you are describing.

Yes and no, ironically.  It’s primitive alright, but not because I live in the boonies.  It’s probably worse than the boonies.

 

I’m right smack next to the state fair in the state capital.  The issue is this was one of the first neighborhoods in the first city in the state to be electrified.  The equipment is ancient.  Like I said, stuff said “bell Edison” on it. As in “Edison” and “Bell”.  You know what “knob and tube” is?  I still got some of that.  I have a friend who was going to electrician school when the house got rewired.  He actually took pictures to show his professor.  I had a few knife switches. Most electrical connections were soldered in wall connections with no junction box wrapped in jute fabric and covered with tar.  Pulled all of THAT out.  Still got one knife switch for the mains.  Box the size of my head.  Apparently they don’t make em like that anymore and the electrician really liked it.

 I was offering myself as an example of the low end.  It likely doesn’t get worse than my house and I can still run phase 2 charging no problem.

[Lady Fitzgerald]

2 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

Yes and no, ironically.  It’s primitive alright, but not because I live in the boonies.  It’s probably worse than the boonies.

 

I’m right smack next to the state fair in the state capital.  The issue is this was one of the first neighborhoods in the first city in the state to be electrified.  The equipment is ancient.  Like I said, stuff said “bell Edison” on it. As in “Edison” and “Bell”.  You know what “knob and tube” is?  I still got some of that.  I have a friend who was going to electrician school when the house got rewired.  He actually took pictures to show his professor.  I had a few knife switches. Most electrical connections were soldered in wall connections with no junction box wrapped in jute fabric and covered with tar.  Pulled all of THAT out.  Still got one knife switch for the mains.  Box the size of my head.  Apparently they don’t make em like that anymore and the electrician really liked it.

 I was offering myself as an example of the low end.  It likely doesn’t get worse than my house and I can still run phase 2 charging no problem.

I know very well what knob and tube wiring is (and yes, it's well out of date). You're still wrong about having two phase power, though. It's single phase.

[Taf the Ghost]

8 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

My assumption is that he means the way people use an EV vs an ICE - eg: fueling up once a week or two at some third party location ("gas station") before returning the vehicle home.

 

This is in large part why a lot of people have range anxiety. They don't understand the paradigm shift involved with an EV - they're worried about charging stations and infrastructure, when most of them won't need them. Your home is your infrastructure. You top up every night, and during the day, you maybe use 10-30% of the charge. So you're hardly ever charging from empty to full - instead, you're charging maybe 15-20% each night.

 

A lot of people find it hard to understand that with an EV, every morning you have a "full tank", so to speak. And because they don't understand that, they keep thinking of it in terms of "Oh, I've used this EV for a week now and my battery is low, so I'll have to go to a station to charge up".

 

And sure, there may be people like that - especially those who don't have a location where they can install a charger. But those aren't going to be the primary buyers an EV for a while anyway.

 

With the current technology and infrastructure, no, an EV isn't for everyone. But a hell of a lot of people could switch to one with zero drawbacks. Far fewer people drive long distances regularly than is made out to be.

 

Same with truck drivers. Far fewer truck owners actually use their truck like a Farmer does. Most of them are just regular people who wanted a big ass truck because 'Murica and they could get one. Most truck owners aren't towing 5th wheels or going to construction sites or hauling cattle or even using a toolbox (which they wouldn't need anyway, with the Cybertruck, as it has built-in tool storage).

 

Personally I think there are only really two valid (semi valid) criticisms of the Cybertruck:

1. Sidewalls on the bed are too high - fair enough.

2. Looks - which is only semi valid because looks are subjective. And frankly, solving problem #1 would also go a long way to solving problem #2 (see the Tweet I quoted above, which just photoshopped the sidewalls to have a normal slope - it looks fucking awesome like that).

"Range Anxiety" was an invented marketing term to try to shame people into buying vehicles that were a significant loss of utility at significantly higher price. Use of the phrase is either a sign you're using a Strawman Argument or you're ignoring that the term was rolled out before there were charging networks or a car that could do 150 miles on a single charge. That's not "anxiety", it's called "not being stupid". 

 

As for what I meant by "Issue is that Pure EVs have operation windows like cellphones", I was actually talking more about the combined lifecycle of the device. ( @mr moose ) However, the day to day management does matter and I should have expanded on both.  For the lifecycle of the device, because of the significantly less complex Machinery in active motion, the points of where will be on the electrical systems over the purely mechanical systems. This is the cellphone lifecycle. As much as we view computation as not being mechanical, it still functionally is. Silicon-based computation is an electro-chemical switch. They do wear out, just at a different rate. And they very much tend to work within their expected range until the moment they "pop". There's very little in way of noticing the gradual decline until the complete collapse. This applies to the computer systems and the batteries.

 

This is why, at the physical layer, Pure EVs do have the life cycle of a cellphone. At least in these second gen modern EVs (this is really something like the 12th generation of EVs), their second-hand value & long-term utility will end up looking similar. You actually have a fairly straight forward early lifecycle where everything is pretty much the same. Then you run into the risk range where the utility is still fine but you now have catastrophic failure risks without any ability to really know they're coming. Since there really doesn't seem like any way of mitigating this, it really means that the segments of the market that Tesla is sticking to is probably the only real market for Pure EVs.

 

Specifically to Teslas, I wouldn't want to be in one after about year 5 or 6. To sell cars, they had to get pretty wild with far too many of the engineering aspects. Those are going to fail in fairly expensive ways. And the InfoTainment system approach still needs to be proved out by their customers over 15 years. When that starts having problems is when the operation life of the vehicle is done. 

 

On the Cybertruck, the deeper criticism, after the hype cycle has died, is actually more simple: it's a Range Rover with a truck bed and batteries. Why is that a problem? On paper, Ranger Rovers are amazing. And, when they work, they are amazing. It's the "when they work" part that's an issue. Right now, the Cybertruck is a spec sheet, and while specs do matter they don't win out in the market on paper.  Oh, and bringing untested 'space age" steel into the body without long-term testing is probably a terrible idea in general. It also is likely going to make these trucks un-repairable and parts on the price range of carbon fiber bits.

 

The only thing that held up on DeLoreans was the stainless steel body panels, so it's not a bad idea to bring that back. (It'll also drive sales.) But the Cybertruck looks like a groceries hauler for the Silicon Valley set. It's taking the whole Flannel shirt wearing Hipster trend to its ultimate conclusion: a Pure EV Truck. 

[Bombastinator]

42 minutes ago, Lady Fitzgerald said:

I know very well what knob and tube wiring is (and yes, it's well out of date). You're still wrong about having two phase power, though. It's single phase.

If it was my dryers wouldn’t work.

It’s not three phase.  I wanted three phase but couldn’t get it.

 

its not 100% I’m not wrong.  I’m not an actual electrician after all.  There’s a non zero chance I got my head up my tail on this one.  I know one though.  I can ask him tomorrow.

 

Aha!  Found it!  It’s a semantics issue.  There is dual phase and there is split phase.  It’s apparently a really really old leftover from before there was AC power and everything was DC.  
 

I got split phase.

 

 It behaves a whole lot like true dual phase but instead of being 90 degrees out it’s more.  Split phase cannot be turned into three phase.  There are people who call it split single phase and people who call it dual phase apparently.

 

tricky omitting the “split” bit and calling it just “single phase”

 

the pertinent bit though is “can I instal level 2 charging?”  The answer is “yes”

[mr moose]

10 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

"Range Anxiety" was an invented marketing term to try to shame people into buying vehicles that were a significant loss of utility at significantly higher price. Use of the phrase is either a sign you're using a Strawman Argument or you're ignoring that the term was rolled out before there were charging networks or a car that could do 150 miles on a single charge. That's not "anxiety", it's called "not being stupid". 

 

As for what I meant by "Issue is that Pure EVs have operation windows like cellphones", I was actually talking more about the combined lifecycle of the device. ( @mr moose ) However, the day to day management does matter and I should have expanded on both.  For the lifecycle of the device, because of the significantly less complex Machinery in active motion, the points of where will be on the electrical systems over the purely mechanical systems. This is the cellphone lifecycle. As much as we view computation as not being mechanical, it still functionally is. Silicon-based computation is an electro-chemical switch. They do wear out, just at a different rate. And they very much tend to work within their expected range until the moment they "pop". There's very little in way of noticing the gradual decline until the complete collapse. This applies to the computer systems and the batteries.

 

This is why, at the physical layer, Pure EVs do have the life cycle of a cellphone. At least in these second gen modern EVs (this is really something like the 12th generation of EVs), their second-hand value & long-term utility will end up looking similar. You actually have a fairly straight forward early lifecycle where everything is pretty much the same. Then you run into the risk range where the utility is still fine but you now have catastrophic failure risks without any ability to really know they're coming. Since there really doesn't seem like any way of mitigating this, it really means that the segments of the market that Tesla is sticking to is probably the only real market for Pure EVs.

 

Specifically to Teslas, I wouldn't want to be in one after about year 5 or 6. To sell cars, they had to get pretty wild with far too many of the engineering aspects. Those are going to fail in fairly expensive ways. And the InfoTainment system approach still needs to be proved out by their customers over 15 years. When that starts having problems is when the operation life of the vehicle is done. 

 

On the Cybertruck, the deeper criticism, after the hype cycle has died, is actually more simple: it's a Range Rover with a truck bed and batteries. Why is that a problem? On paper, Ranger Rovers are amazing. And, when they work, they are amazing. It's the "when they work" part that's an issue. Right now, the Cybertruck is a spec sheet, and while specs do matter they don't win out in the market on paper.  Oh, and bringing untested 'space age" steel into the body without long-term testing is probably a terrible idea in general. It also is likely going to make these trucks un-repairable and parts on the price range of carbon fiber bits.

 

The only thing that held up on DeLoreans was the stainless steel body panels, so it's not a bad idea to bring that back. (It'll also drive sales.) But the Cybertruck looks like a groceries hauler for the Silicon Valley set. It's taking the whole Flannel shirt wearing Hipster trend to its ultimate conclusion: a Pure EV Truck. 

 

You can have a part suddenly go pop and instantly disable an ICE as well, there is literally no bigger risk in an EV of sudden breakdown than any other vehicle type.