Tesla Cybertruck: The Future?

shade

Well-known member
Well, I think a lot less of the community on here then I did before I posted this for one. Chromed-out, coal-rolling, dumb hick mobiles blocking charging stations are coming to mind for the first time, lol. I'll keep it around for its comic value and the handful of good analysis peppered in this stratified ********. As neither fanboy nor hater, the future will play this out regardless.
Please realize that we're trying to dilute the derpy-derp with silly-derp, and still keep the original intent of the thread alive.

Also, you might want to avoid those gun threads. cereal
 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
I dream of a Tesla lawn traktor !
Quiet, low maintenance, freakish design. What more could a suburban lawnmowing guy want ?

Take a look here: I have wanted one for ages:

 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
Please realize that we're trying to dilute the derpy-derp with silly-derp, and still keep the original intent of the thread alive.

Also, you might want to avoid those gun threads. cereal

Well, if you can't win on arguments, just divert, divert, divert, and remember to make funny faces while you do it. That'll teach them.
 

docwatson

Adventurer
I don't think anyone is arguing against EVs, fundamentally, here. Everyone has pretty much acknowledged that they are a great choice for the majority of consumers but they have their issues. It would be ridiculous to adopt every technological advancement without thinking through it. (I am looking at you Facebook)

People just don't like Musk. Which is somewhat warranted. The guy has an ego, some people are ok with that some aren't. He has made some pretty bold claims and not always backed them up.

You can hate Musk and love EVs...well Tesla has done a lot for EVs so maybe you can't.

But I like to keep an open mind so I avoid people that disagree with me...
 

shade

Well-known member
Well, if you can't win on arguments, just divert, divert, divert, and remember to make funny faces while you do it. That'll teach them.
I see you and Charlie Sheen have something else in common.

If you're coming here to win, you may want to examine that motivation at your next Infallible Expert Group meeting.
 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
I see you and Charlie Sheen have something else in common.

If you're coming here to win, you may want to examine that motivation at your next Infallible Expert Group meeting.

I don't come here to "win". But winning or losing an argument is a real thing. There are good arguments, bad arguments, and a lot of fallacies, including non-sequiturs, like the one you just uttered.
 

shade

Well-known member
I don't come here to "win". But winning or losing an argument is a real thing. There are good arguments, bad arguments, and a lot of fallacies, including non-sequiturs, like the one you just uttered.
I don't think you know what that non sequitur means, but you're infallible, so I must be wrong.


And with that, as much as I'm tempted to keep showing everyone what you are, I'll honor my Ignore List and let you sink back to obscurity. bye
 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
I don't think you know what that non sequitur means, but you're infallible, so I must be wrong.


And with that, as much as I'm tempted to keep showing everyone what you are, I'll honor my Ignore List and let you sink back to obscurity. bye

And you continue with your strawmanning. I don't think I'm "infallible". But I do know how physics work.

I'm sorry, should I have called it a diversion tactic instead? A red herring?

You do realise that you're quoting yourself making the same idiotic "infallible" claim, right? You are not only giving up when it comes to logic, you're using the accusation of "infallibility" as a cop out.

That is how you lose an argument: Making sh.tuff up, making claims with no bearing on reality, and try to divert, divert, divert.

Just because someone knows more than you doesn't mean they think of themselves as "infallible", but if that is how you cope with reality, I guess I should just respect it, right?
 

luthj

Engineer In Residence
I mentioned it in the other Telsa truck thread, but I believe that EVs have the potential to majorly disrupt the used car market, and the fleet own/lease market.

Why? Because the drivetrain reliability is not impacted significantly by its age or miles. Typically vehicles are retired because the interiors or exteriors are worn, or because maintenance costs are rising quickly. With a drivetrain that is plenty reliable even past 15 years, there is more incentive to refurb the interior, and resell as used. This could produce a significant aftermarket (think lower prices) for the refurb parts. If Telsa avoids major design changes every few years like some MFGs do, this type of refurb and resell will be even more sought after. Think 150k miles and 7-10 years at roughly 40-60% of new prices.
 
Last edited:

luthj

Engineer In Residence
We could stick to conversation instead of argument and then nobody has to lose anything. Except taxpayers when they subsidize vanity purchases. But no other losing.

So you don't think reduced ground level pollution is a benefit to the public? Or are you being intentionally obtuse? You appear to also be implying that EVs have no other use than as vanity objects.

Again I ask, do you understand what it means to make an argument in good faith? Or are you just trolling? Maybe we should get that Musk hate thread going for you to vent some of it?
 

Pilat

Tossing ewoks on Titan
If Telsa avoids major design changes every few years like some MFGs do, this type of refurb and resell will be even more sought after. Think 150k miles and 7-10 years at roughly 40-60% of new prices.

Wouldn't it then be in the interest of the mfgs to make sure they make major design changes every few years?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,911
Messages
2,879,535
Members
225,497
Latest member
WonaWarrior
Top