Or is it Teslas kill the big boys in a head to head sales battle. Too bad they can't make a better car to really compete and nothing much better than the 2012 Tesla on the horizon.
I dont see the Bolt or the iPace or the eNero as Tesla killers, but rather an inevitable shift away from polluting ICE cars to EVs. I'm just glad there's an American car company in the mix, and that the Tesla Model 3 is so awesome!
I don't want Tesla to either kill or be killed. I want a vibrant EV marketplace with multiple successful vendors. That's the way to the future.
But, damn, we're off to a fine start with Tesla!
Killer or not, I think it all depends on price and design.
I agree, we need more good EV's. I just don't see why GM, Audi, Porsche, MB, Jaguar and ??? can't match the 2012 Tesla model S specs:
265 mile range
seating for 5-7
0-60 in 5 seconds
Nationwide free charging
Styling is debatable, but the new cars really can't even match the original Model S yet on the major factors, but the news call them all Tesla killers. We need more good EV's, not just more EV's until Tesla can build millions a year.
More EVs is better.
More EV charging is best.
Even garbage EVs (short-range, clown-cars, weird-mobiles) can be useful if there is excessive charging.
But unless these EVs are autonomous-capable, they aren't in the same league as Tesla.
There are many reasons they will not be competing much with Tesla. Batteries, performance and supply. Elon is so far ahead that they may never catch up.
Also, the ICE cars will be hard for them to give up, they are their profit cars.
If Ford does not get ahead of Tesla then they are done, the F150 will die when the Tesla truck is produced in volume. That Tesla truck will be better in every way and much cost much less to operate.
They don't have to build 'Tesla Killers' at all. Just look at what they currently consider to be the BEST ICE vehicles in their lineup, then design an EV that is BETTER. How hard can that be?
The problem is that traditional automobile manufacturers choose the opposite method. They choose their worst ICE, then build an even worse EV version.
Back in the 1980s, when Chrysler had a 'surprise hit' with their various minivans, it took barely three years before their biggest competitors offered their own 'me too' vehicles. It's been six years since the Model S arrived... Three years since the Model X arrived... Over a year since the Model 3 was released... Six years since the Supercharger network was unveiled... Testimonial after testimonial that the existence of that DC Fast Charging network is fundamental to the devision to buy... The Model S took the criwn away from S-Class... The Model X has supplanted the Porsche Cayenne... The Model 3 has left 3-Series in the dust... And no one plans to release 'serious competition' to any of them until 'sometime after 2020'...? [WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT]?
The idea of one car maker is silly so why would anyone want one EV car maker?
I want all car makers to switch to EV.. Period.
I like Tesla now because it is the best. No competition. Period. However that's not in anyone's best interest. I want tonnes of excellent EV choices on the future. Maybe it won't be Tesla for me next time. Who knows. But ICE needs to go.
I own a gen 1 Leaf and a scrappy dodge pickup. I couldn't have said it better. Quoting multiple people:
"If Ford does not get ahead of Tesla then they are done, the F150 will die when the Tesla truck is produced in volume."
"traditional automobile manufacturers ... choose their worst ICE, then build an even worse EV version"
" Testimonial after testimonial that the existence of that DC Fast Charging network is fundamental to the devision[sic] to buy"
"And no one plans to release 'serious competition' to any of them until 'sometime after 2020'...?"
I waited and waited for an announcement for a 60KW leaf; radio silence... I test drove a Bolt; missing a bunch of features and is 87% the cost of a LR RWD M3. The next day I went and ordered a T M3. There is just no comparison. The philosophies of the companies are very different. It's the attitude that pisses me off. They're all clearly compliance cars priced to extract tax credits, not to sell. I wouldn't pay more than $20,000 for the Bolt with no incentives, and that's being generous when comparing it to an ICE of the same size/config.
I believe today the legacy car makers are seeing the need to force change into their philosophy. It may be too late though - the most serious competition in the EV market for Tesla most likely will not carry a legacy name. More likely to be Lucid, Niro, one of those chinese startups. Perhaps Hyundai might be a "legacy" company that makes it into the game.
To all those analysts saying things like "When (chevy, ford, volvo, whatever legacy company) gets their produc t out in a couple of years Tesla will be in trouble" I call a very loud BULLSHIT. A legacy car company history is no advantage in EV market competition.
@JAD: "I just don't see why GM, Audi, Porsche, MB, Jaguar and ??? can't match the 2012 Tesla model S specs:
265 mile range
seating for 5-7
0-60 in 5 seconds
Nationwide free charging"
I'll go one better and say all I ask of a decent EV is 250+ mile range, seating for at least 4, and a nationwide charging network with reasonable prices. I'd love to have a dozen cars to choose from that meet those specs.
"I'll go one better and say all I ask of a decent EV is ... a nationwide charging network with reasonable prices"
Musk already offered up his network to competitors back in 2014. None one did. This is a solvable problem. The legacys refuse to build a network, and refuse to use an existing network.
At this point, Tesla are building vehicles at twice the rate of Jaguar, and also at half the rate of Jaguar-Land Rover combined.
How can a company like Jaguar-Land Rover compete on an R&D basis with Tesla, while they are also spending money to make incremental improvements to their existing ICEs to compete with MB, Porsche, BMW, etc?
Similar problem at Porsche. Tesla is now at a production rate of vehicles greater than Porsche. How can they spend R&D money on a competitive BEV while spending money on ICEs to compete with Jaguar, MB, BMW, etc?
Repeat for MB, BMW, Toyota, Honda, etc, etc.
If any of these companies quit spending high percentages of their R&D on ICEs, their ICE competitors will eat their lunch, and they won't have R&D money to spend on anything..
Jaguar was founded in 1922. Tesla was founded in 2003.
Jaguar sold 39,954 vehicles in the U.S. in 2017. Tesla sold 50,145 vehicles to U.S. Customers in 2017.
So far during 2018, Jaguar has sold 20,947 vehicles in the U.S. During Q3 2018 alone, Tesla had 68,350 U.S. sales. That's a 3.36:1 advantage in favor of Tesla. With 29,975 U.S. sales during September 2018 alone, Tesla outsold all Jaguar vehicles combined this year by 9,028 units last month alone.
OK, maybe I stand corrected, there are a couple of very impressive cars coming in about two years from one of the big guys, since it looks like Tesla is now one of the big guys. The new Model Y and Roadster look like serious competition and may well be better than what Tesla offered in 2012 or even offer now. Finally, legitimate Tesla killers from the big guys, too bad they are also Teslas....
Haha. Leave it to Tesla to raise the bar higher... again.
The specs are ancient but the price point has dropped. We have to standardize on chargers, battery, self driving for price to drop even further.
@M3BlueGeorgia - I agree with you. Everybody thinks "it should be so easy for the legacy manufacturers to build an EV if they really wanted to".
Think what would happen to the CEO of, say, Ford, if he suddenly drove the company into the red by investing billions in a battery factory, and more billions for a fresh slate design, and hundreds of millions reworking a factory to build it in. And, oh yeah, the dealers are going to actively try to not sell the car because they love doing all those $oil changes and other assorted ICE maintenance. So, he gets his board unhappy, the dealers are unhappy, and the stockholders are unhappy.
So, perhaps Ford does a design so compelling that it blows away the Tesla designs. But how likely is that? I don't think I'd want to bet my retirement on that. Fords' designs are generally... uninspired.
So if he does all this, he gets booted, and while no doubt having a comfortable retirement, who seriously wants to be the guy who killed Ford? And who seriously thinks his board would even let him try?
Or, he can keep doing what he's doing, which is the same as all the other legacy manufacturers, and while ultimately steering the company towards a cliff, it's going to take years (maybe) before all the repercussions of his (in)actions take place, by which time he's retired to the Hamptons and can tell himself that he didn't do any worse than the CEOs of all the other legacy manufacturers...
Seriously, none of these guys are on a mission to save the planet, so why should they stick their necks out? Sure, it's going to be a rocky future, and maybe 1 or 2 of the legacy manufacturers will go belly up, but generally they'll all drag their feet as long as possible and slowly get dragged into producing viable BEVs. They can probably drag it out to 20 years before the transition to EV is complete.
So, for their own self interest, their best bet is to do just what they are doing - put their toe in the water building some compliance EVs so that when/if it becomes time to get serious they have a little experience, meanwhile continue to make ICE for as long as they can... Changing the shape of the taillights on occasion... a little incremental improvement to the interiors... This industry has been a master at little tweaks that keep the buying public interested for decades. And brand loyalty and ICE loyalty is definitely there. You won't convince a fair number of the public to go to BEV... You just have to wait until they get old and die, and their kids and grandkids will embrace the BEV.
Wow, that got cynical!
But their thinking may be getting forced into that direction. Ford is evidently planning on an EV F150. Has to be the combination of the talk of the Tesla truck, when coupled with the Model 3 production and delivery successes.
Demand for EV choices is clear these days.
No matter what demand is, and no matter how quickly legacy auto makers try to pivot, they will go through their own hells on their way to try to catch up. And they will never quite catch up. Many will never make it at all.
History and experience making ICE vehicles will not ease their paths. It certainly hasn't to this point.
"I agree, we need more good EV's. I just don't see why GM, Audi, Porsche, MB, Jaguar and ??? can't match the 2012 Tesla model S specs:
265 mile range
seating for 5-7
0-60 in 5 seconds
Nationwide free charging"
It's either, not that they can't they just won't, because they won't give up their ICE heritage, or
it's that they just can't engineer that good of a vehicle because they won't do it from the ground up like TESLA did.
They drop in the electronics to an already designed chassis and have to conform to it. Build it from the ground up with the right styling and they might have a winner.
I think it's probably a combination of both. Won't give up on their heritage business and therefore sabotage any real EV efforts and end up with compliance cars.
Or maybe Elon hired the best and brightest engineers that created the best outcome.
@nexxus, except the i3, bolt, mission e and others were ground up redesigns. They may have been forced into some old school decisions, but that is how large corporations work and why they are not Tesla killers.
The bolt price is decent, but despite the battery cost being about half of what it was in 2012, most of the competition is still in the $80k range of the model S.
This topic is interesting for me this week because I spent a lot of time browsing the new Audi E-tron details (or lack of?) this week. I have a P3D- ordered and am in the "preparing for delivery" stage with no VIN assigned yet, but no edit options either. I could cancel that order at any time and request my $2500 and I seriously considered the idea. (past tense)
Why consider it? I have a family with 2 toddlers. I have a bicycle that I am used to fitting inside my Ford Explorer Limited with 3rd row seating. I cannot easily afford a new Model X and don't want to buy a pre-owned Model X as it gets so close to a refresh. The features Audi is promoting are tempting at the same price point of the P3D- I just ordered. I almost bought an Audi SUV before choosing my Ford Explorer. I like the looks and tech in their cars. Maybe I would prefer Apple Carplay. Maybe the massage seats would be amazing for long drives. They boast that the range is greater than the current Model X and how it will charge faster. The interior looks really comfortable.
Why not? I realized there are a few reasons. (1) Like many of you, I am annoyed with legacy car companies continuing to focus on ICE vehicles knowing what we know about their environmental impact and gasoline dependency. (2) I love Tesla's business model (3) I love the technology Tesla offers in their vehicles and that the software upgrades are included, and are frequent (4) After going plant-based (vegan), it bothers me that Audi only features real leather seating (5) "Maintenance" costs seem to be crazy expensive and the discounted 4 yr maintenance package is $999 - yikes (6) The newer fast-charging appears to be a nice feature, but the Tesla supercharging/destination charging network makes more sense for me now (7) April 2019 is when deliveries begin... we all know how that goes (8) EAP and FSD seem farther away for Audi, but who knows
I am giving up cargo & passenger space and I'm paying a lot for a small, sporty sedan. I hope the EV industry becomes more competitive. For now, I want to support the company that has been and still leads the path forward for EVs. Maybe I'll change my mind next year. If I do, at least my P3D- will have great resale value and I'll pickup 3 extra jobs to pay for the next Model X or the Audi E-tron. I'm certain I won't regret buying a Model 3. As far as the Bolt and other EVs currently out, I wouldn't even consider them - no competition there from my perspective, but it's great that people are moving to EVs.
Thanks for the vote of confidence. I think you'll be impressed with the P3D performance and surprised with the amount of space.
I was able to transport two bikes with both rear seats down. And there is a great roof rack.
To break-even on the Bolt, GM would have needed to sell it for at least $10K more, which was not viable.
And they would have had to resolve the fast charging road trip issue, which they haven't shown any interest in doing.
And they would have had to offer a version with a larger battery and AWD, which they also haven't shown any interest in doing.
As someone said only Tesla can destroy Tesla.
Manufacturing hell never affected us.
Delivery Hell is and they are doing nothing to fix it.
Yeah. The problem is that traditional automobile manufacturers continue to look at the wrong numbers. So they make decisions without complete data and get the wrong results. They have spent so many years 'making it up on the back end' through parts and service, that they don't know how to build a car that is profitable from the outset. That's why their conpliance cars require a 100% premium over similar ICE cars. It is an attempt to 'recover lost revenue' ahead of time that they won't be seeing on the back end due to electric drive.
What they should do is simply abandon that philosophy (and the highly profitable revenue it generates) and learn to 'live within their means' for a while. Ford currently has something like $12,000,000,000 cash on hand, and got $5,900,000,000 from the DoE through the ATVM Loan Program nearly a decade ago. Since that time, they have built the Ford Focus Electric, Fusion Energi Plug-in, CMAX Energi Plug-in, and nothing else that I am aware of...
Ford is on their third CEO in the past three years. Yet, the current guy doesn't seem to be moving any faster toward 'electrification' of their fleet than any of their predecessors. It seems a Golden Parachute is on hand by default for anyone that 'bails out' from the role, so they are set up with being the scapegoat as being part of the deal from the outset. So they'd might as well go for it, I think. A legacy of failure looks no better than a legacy of innovation.
The path forward for F-Series trucks has been obvious for years. They already market their Pickups based upon towing capacity and torque. Their customers are already familiar with that terminology, and already know the range sucks -- it is simply expected that an extended capacity fuel tank is a necessity for a 'good work truck'. So all they have to do is build a nationwide DC fast charging infrastructure using the funds they ordinarily spend on advertising each year.
So, with the 'instant torque' of electric drive and more towing capacity than any pickup under the sun while still managing the same range while loaded or unladen as the diesels they'll no longer build? Their electric trucks will be in as great demand as their petrol pickups already are... And their reliability and customer satisfaction sratistics will go through the roof. All they have to do is sacrifice the guaranteed income from replacement parts sales. Of course, withe millions upon millions of ICE F-Series pickups on the road, it may be another 25-to-40 years before they are all replaced by all electric variants anyway. So, AutoZone, NAPA, Pep·Boys, and O'Reilly auto parts stores will still be in business for quite some time after no new ICE pickups are built any longer.
A shame they won't even try until Tesla has passed Toyota, RAM, and Chevrolet in pickup sales...
@M3, but you have to ask why it should cost GM ~$40k to build a basic Bolt, when Tesla appears able to build the 3 for under $30k according to most experts? I think that may be a big insight into the inefficiency the big guys actually have.
I think that is Tesla's long term unbeatable advantage, they can build the exact same car for 20%+ less than anyone else and the new factories are only going to make the price gap bigger. I am guessing the other guys could build the Model S equivalent, but it would cost $120k and they know that wouldn't sell, so they compromise and make cars with less range and parts bin items to bring the price inline with Tesla and then sell their history to hit quotas.
"On December 19, 2008, President Bush agreed to a $24.9 billion bailout using TARP: $13.4 billion for GM, $5.5 billion for Chrysler, and $5 billion for GMAC.
In response, the companies promised to fast-track development of energy-efficient vehicles and consolidate operations"
Here we are 10 years later and I give you................the bolt.
Those who hold onto the idea of a Tesla killer concept are still of the mindset that the market is limited to those who drive EVs today. In September 2018, %age of US passenger cars sold that were not ICEs was nearly 8%. September 2017 same figure was under 2%. It's happening. The EV market is not limited to some tiny niche. 8% down, 92% to go. A boatload of growth potential there.
265 mile range
seating for 5-7
0-60 in 5 seconds
Nationwide free charging"
And how much was the 2012 Tesla Model S?? Almost twice the price of a Bolt.
People have a tendency to forget that Teslas are expensive cars and loosing the Tax rebate is not helping...
Tesla does not want to kill anyone. Those companies are doing it to themselves. No one, I repeat no one, is even close to as serious as Tesla in competing in the EV market. They have a lot mouths to feed and don't want hundreds of billions of capital investment in engine and transmission manufacturing to go down the drain too soon. Tesla is just doing what it needs to do to make their strategy not working. If it kills anyone in the process it's not Tesla's fault.
Alex_SD: Fully loaded Tesla Model S Signature edition vehicles still cost less than fully loaded Mercedes-AMG S-Class, BMW/Alpina 7-Series, AUDI A8, and Porsche Panamera Turbo S vehicles. Expensive or not, they were still a bargain compared to ICE cars in the same class.
The Chevrolet BOLT has never been a bargain compared to a Honda FIT, Ford Focus, or Volkswagen GOLF. Therein lies the difference, and why the Model S outsold its direct ICE competitors while the BOLT has not. The Model S surely would have sold far less if its initial base price were in the $160,000-to-$200,000 price range, but it wasn't. And in 2013, its first full calendar year of availability, the Model S found more U.S. Customers than the BOLT got in all of 2017. Price points don't matter, results do.
Good point ReD. Why is Model S outsold ~$100K S Class, 7 Series and Panamera, Model 3 outsold ~50K C Class, 3/4 Series, A4/A5, many of those by a large margin, while Bold is not even selling 5% volume of compact crossovers like RAV4 and CR-V that cost about the same after figuring out tax rebates and dealer discount? In general public's eyes Bolt is just not a good or competitive car. That's no way to get people to switch from ICE to EV.
I"m continuously shocked/not-shocked at how poorly the largest automakers have fared against Tesla.
Jaguar i-Pace is at least fun for 160 miles until it runs out of charge.
None have a charging network in place. None competes with a 2012 Tesla P85 in terms of acceleration or range, much less with anything built in 2018.
And these cars that come closest are still years away. 8-10 years out of date.
@Alex, I think the Bolt is the best non-Tesla EV. The 2012 model S price compares well to most of the EV's, Jaguar, Porsche, MB, Audi are bringing "soon", which don't really match the size, speed, range, and charging of that car. The Leaf and Bolt do ok on price, but lack so many other items that it isn't really a comparison. On the whole, nothing coming from anyone but Tesla is really better than the 2012 S.
For me price is the most important. The range and acceleration come second as long as I get at least 100 miles which is very common these days. I will NEVER spend >$50k on cars (ICE or not), period. Cars are the assets with the worst possible depreciation curve... Cars are for transportation and need to be reliable, low maintenance and good for the environment as a bonus.
I've waited years for the Model 3 because it meets my criteria. I would have wanted the SR, not the LR, but I figured that the Tax rebate covers most of the price difference... Now, granted, why waiting for the M3 when I could have purchased a Bolt for cheaper and earlier? I did have a little preference for American made (California made) and I wanted to help a visionary start up like Tesla... But, again, only when the price was right...
carlk: Yeah. I kind of hate it when people look at the numbers wrong, then say things like, "Until Tesla offers a car for under $25,000 they'll NEVER..." without noting they have already met that parameter with the First Production Model 3 at $49,000 minimum. The Model 3 outsold 116 passenger vehicles out of 121 listed by GoodCarBadCar in August 2018. They probably did at least as well in September 2018 U.S. Sales. Oh, wait, they did...
At #4 overall among passenger cars, the Model 3 outsold 133 of 137 vehicles in the U.S. during August 2018, including the Toyota Corolla, per GoodCarBadCar. Of course, GCBC originally reported 20,000+ Model 3 sales in the U.S. for August 2018, then revised the amount downward to 'only' 17,800 units later. They might do something similar again...
I guarantee a $49,000 Corolla would not sell as well as it does today.
SEPTEMBER 2018 U.S. PASSENGER CAR SALES
(10,000 UNITS OR MORE)
10-03-2018 ___ GoodCarBadCar
27,640 ___ Toyota Camry
25,357 ___ Honda Accord
24,806 ___ Honda Civic
22,250 ___ Tesla Model 3
20,797 ___ Toyota Corolla
19,923 ___ Hyundai Elantra
16,795 ___ Nissan Sentra
15,878 ___ Ford Fusion
11,867 ___ Nissan Altima
10,976 ___ Kia Optima
10,631 ___ Volkswagen Jetta
10,540 ___ Kia Soul
10,517 ___ Chevrolet CRUZE
10,211 ___ Chevrolet MALIBU
Alex_SD: OK, fine. If price is most important to you, that is a position you may certainly take in a logical fashion. My point is that no Tesla product released since 2012 has actually been 'overpriced' considering the generally accepted and not protested prices of direct ICE competitors that were judged 'worth it'. That, despite that their interiors continued themes from 19th century visions of 'luxury' first made popular during the Victorian Era with horsedrawn stagecoach and carriage design and the continued expense of maintenance and repair for ICE vehicles designed from the outset to be rolling spare parts conveyances adorned with hand crafted window dressing. Logically speaking, there's not much technological difference between a $12,110 Nissan VERSA and a $38,950 Lexus ES. ICE is still ICE.
When Tesla is able to fulfill orders for Standard Range and base MSRP vehicles, their Sales of Midel 3 will only increase, hopefully shutting up all those NaySayers who declared '$35,000 is not mass market' for the past five years while completely ignoring how the average sale price for NEW cars gradually increased from around $31,000 to over $35,000. Just know that your personal discipline to NEVER spend more than $50,000 for any vehicle is not shared by the majority of NEW car buyers. That is the reality and the reason why 'cheap NEW cars' do not dominate the market.
Come on, everything we saw as of right now expect the Jaguar I-Pace is not even Tesla's competitor.
The other car makers are releasing cars in 2019, 2020 to compete with Tesla's 2016, 2017 model and call it Tesla Killer? I even saw a new Tech company called Faraday Future built a Lab car to compete stats with Tesla's mass-produced Model S and declare their car is better than Tesla. How about Tesla put some Space X rockets on the side and made the car travel 40533 miles/hour, 0.0222s /quarter mile. Beat that with your Lab car and then we can call it a competitor.
Also, Tesla is expecting a 20% battery capacity increase in the next couple of years. So by 2010, we will probably see P110D or P120D in the market, which will put Tesla way ahead of anyone else, again. Not even mentioning the supercharge network and signature AP.
I guess the only area in which Tesla needs some improvement would be the interior design and manufacturing. The 100-year industrial design and manufacturing experience looks like the only advantage held by the traditional automakers.
In a way, we probably should call Tesla a traditional car killer!
They cannot build a competitive model at a competitive price because they are doing stupid things, like using their long automotive experience. They are doing things like:
1. Trying to take an existing ICE vehicle design and turn it into an EV
2. Trying to use their experienced legacy automotive design engineers to apply their ICE experience to a different kind of vehicle
3. Trying to use their ICE vehicle supply chains and suppliers to build an EV from ICE parts
4. Realizing that they are not making progress, recognizing that they are trapped in their own mud, but going through the same processes the same way, hoping somehow to get a different result
All four are really different variations on the same theme. Legacy car interiors are not superior, in my opinion OROCHIzc......
I only plan on purchasing Tesla vehicles here on out for the following reasons:
1. They were the only company who had the guts to do this.
2. They have the best charging network.
3. American made and I support that.
4. Best performance.
5. Every other manufacturer had their chance and I don’t reward complacency.
OROCHIzc: If by 'some improvement' you mean adopting the style used by traditional automobile manufacturers to exhibit 'luxury'? That ain't gonna happen at Tesla, ever. All you have to do is look at sales figures for Genesis G90 to see why. But, if you happen to need more and have some time on your hands, watch this, published July 8,2014...
Javier Verdura -- Director of Product Design at Tesla Motors (Behind the Scenes) | Media Leaders (54:37)https://youtu.be/ErA3QEZ41ME
The Q&A section is particularly interesting and begins just after the 27:00 mark. In general I get the feeling that Tesla wants their interior design to be forward thinking, instead of hearkening back to the past. Think about how in architecture, both a Victorian home and a Mid Century Modern home might be expensive, but their design aesthetics are completely different. Yet one romanticizes the past, while the other is hopeful for what may be accomplished in the future. There will never be a steampunk inspired Tesla.
The losses from last year's sales for the month for the three car brands that outsold the Model 3 approximately summed to the number of 3s sold. I wonder how meetings are going at those companies.
@Alex_SD: "And how much was the 2012 Tesla Model S?? Almost twice the price of a Bolt."
OK, Is there anything the legacies make at twice the price that matches 2012 Tesla S?
Is there anything from the Lomborghinis, Bugattis, Ferraris, Porsches that matches 2008 Tesla Roadster, at that price? At any price?
2012 Model S started at 57,400 so tax credit would get it under $50k. How much is the Bolt?
I basically agree with all said so far. That is why i have driven Tesla since 2014.
BUT, there is a glimmer of hope for EVs from the German companies and GM. Here in the US (not sure if Canada included) the Electrify America project (part of the dieselgate settlement) is planning a pretty good nationwide quickcharge network similar to Tesla Superchargers. And it should be well on its way to completion next year, and i think, fully developed by 2020. They seem to have 6 - 8 chargers are each location, which is not too bad. Nearly all are CCS tho, apparently only one Chademo charger at each location, so the Asian carmakers are essentially left out of the deal.
And of course, there is the upcoming Ionity network in Europe as well.
I have no idea why some want Tesla to "improve" the interior design when it already has the most advanced design. I dare to predict in a decade or so every car interior will look similar to this. Many of them are already slowly and conservatively going this direction.
@TranzNDance I clicked on that link it's shocking that the ice manufacturers have not woken up yet!