SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
cmn32480
on Tuesday June 23 2015, @08:40PM
from the how-many-cup-holders-does-it-have dept.
from the how-many-cup-holders-does-it-have dept.
According to the Washington Post, Tesla CEO Elon Musk has said in the past that the Model S is "a little too guy centric." It's an issue that the company is actively trying to correct with X, a vehicle that's expected to cost between $50,000-$70,000.
And it seems to be working, with more than half of the pre-orders for the Model X coming from women.
That's certainly a good thing. In 2014, women account for 40% of the nearly 17 million cars and trucks sold the US, the Washington Post reported. For crossover SUVs, that number is closer to 50%.
Do EVs really have gender specific appeal?
Original Submission
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Tesla is Finally Building an SUV — and They Want it to Appeal to Women
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 45 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Our business is run on trust. We trust you will pay in advance.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday June 23 2015, @10:25PM
Hey, can you haul this full-height refrigerator for me? Oh, and this queen size mattress and box spring set.
Both minivans and SUVs can be useful for hauling things, but they'll never really compare to a pickup.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday June 24 2015, @12:52AM
To build my gaming table, we managed to fit a 3/4" sheet of plywood and a sheet of melamine into a station wagon. The entire time I found myself wishing my minivan was still operational, but the rack and pinion had worn itself down to the point that it was scary driving it. Those were the days.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 1) by Kharnynb on Wednesday June 24 2015, @05:21AM
My xsara picasso can fit a decent amount of kit and has a pulling hook for a trailer....
I hate the big Suvs as they reduce visibility at parking lots and crossings for people in normal cars.
Not to mention the usually atrocious gas milage and weight.
And 90% of these people never even use it to go off-road or in any worse weather conditions than light rain....
I can drive perfectly fine in Finnish winter in a front-weel drive car, then you can probally manage the once a year rain storm in cali...
Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
(Score: 2) by aclarke on Wednesday June 24 2015, @05:59PM
I'm not really disagreeing with you, but just pointing out a few things. First of all, not all of us on the site live in California, and it's not really appropriate to use that as a pejorative anyway.
Second, I did live in California for quite a while, and it's the fact that it only rains once a year, or at least not for months, that makes the roads very dangerous when it does rain. People have summer tires on, and the roads have had 8 months of detergent buildup from exhaust fumes that make the roads VERY slippery. If you're driving a FWD car in Finland in the snow, you probably at least have snow tires on. I can assure you as a Canadian in a similar climate to yours that a wet road in southern California after 8 months of dry weather makes for very slippery and dangerous conditions.
Most people around here do just fine with FWD cars, year round. Then again, it's hard to argue that AWD isn't in most cases safer than FWD, and everyone's circumstances are different. I'd rather we all spent a bit more on better cars, and a bit less on salting the roadways. But that's another pet peeve for another discussion.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Wednesday June 24 2015, @12:40PM
I've never done that and never will. Delivery is too cheap. When I have hauled giant things, the home depot truck still costs $19 for 90 minutes. I rent it about every other year, maybe a little less. That does cost me about $10/yr average. However it saves me about $50K in the cost delta between a giant pickup and my commuter car.
When you start talking about spending $50K to "save money on deliveries" you pretty much have to run a moving company to run a net profit. Like every single week haul a fridge somewhere. Otherwise it starts getting cheaper to hire a truck driver.
About ten years ago $250 got me a flatbed truck driver and his forklift to deliver a small load of patio supplies (multiple pallets of bricks, gravel, sand, and other stuff). I could have spent $75K to get a pickup truck and drive about 5 hand loaded and hand unloaded trips, but I saved $74750 and had someone else do all the work for me. I suppose in the grand scheme of things putting in that patio probably was more work than transporting the material, LOL.
Its interesting that the difference in "car" payment between a pickup truck and a car means I could afford to hire a pro roughly monthly, in addition to the lower maint cost of my car.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday June 24 2015, @01:38PM
That's right. Unless you're somebody who runs his own contracting business and has to haul equipment or lumber or something around everyday, or you need 4WD because you have a ranch and need to be able to haul feed around the back 100, there's no real reason to have a big truck. It's harder to park, it costs way more to fuel, and it's not as versatile as a van or hatchback.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday June 24 2015, @03:01PM
Those are likely to be bought and owned by the business anyway, rather than individuals.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Thursday June 25 2015, @03:06AM
I own a truck (mid-size pickup) which is also my commuter vehicle (22mpg actual) and I probably paid about the same for it as you did for your commuter car (~$18k). Maintenance is no more expensive, so a truck does not need to cost much more than a car. Certainly not $50k more. The biggest difference is the fuel costs, which would only be ~$3000 (assuming the car gets 30mpg) for the 114k miles I've driven mine in the 11 years I've owned it. That only comes out to an extra ~$270 per year that I'm paying to own a truck. Since I use it to carry something big enough to not fit in a car at least once every couple of months, I avoid more than $114 (6 x $19) in rental fees each year. That means I'm paying less than $156 a year for the convenience of being able to haul anything I need to whenever I want. Doesn't seem like such a bad deal to me.
If we also consider that I take my truck camping 3 or 4 times a year to places a car just can't go, I think I made the best choice I could at the time for my usage.
That being said, my next vehicle purchase will be an Elio assuming they make it into production. At $6800 and 84mpg it will pay for itself twice over in the next 114k miles just in the fuel savings (assuming gas prices average $3.5/gal or more over the next decade).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 24 2015, @02:53PM
Yes, I can put the mattress on the top of my minivan like everyone else does, and it won't bend and overhang out the back of the pickup. I can haul a shitload more plywood/drywall than in a pickup for the same reason; you can lay it flat. Plus, rain/snow is not an issue to worry about.
No, I cannot haul a full-size fridge unless it lays down. I've hauled every other major appliance in the van though. Also cabinetry. I've done kitchen and bathroom remodels and had no problems bringing in the new tubs, cabinets, etc.
So apart from hauling fridges around (which I've only needed to do once in 40 years) or loose top soil, I've found a van is much better general purpose vehicle than a pickup.
By the way, an SUV is entirely unsuitable for any of the stuff we're talking about, unless you're talking about real SUV's, like Suburbans from the 90's. Today you wouldn't try to push anything into the back of an SUV for fear of tearing the leather seats.