Forums

False Advertising - Nitpicking

False Advertising - Nitpicking

From the Home Page:

"Model S
$575 /mo after gas savings"

I mentioned this before. Last night I paid $2.39 a gallon here on my way to NY City. Forget that I currently drive a Prius and that at this point buying the Model S will probably at best be cost neutral in terms of fuel/service/electricity. Few if any car owners are going to be saving any significant money switching to the Model S - especially if you live in a high cost utility neighborhood like I do.

It puts me off saying this on the "home page". I don't know too many people ponying up $100,000.00 whose primary intention is to save a few $$$ on gasoline and oil changes.

My $0.02

overthewoods | 12. oktober 2015

Here on the central coast of California I paid $3.59/gal to fill up our Mini Cooper S last week, and that car gets around 30 mpg. So that's almost 12 cents a mile for fuel. We charge the Model S overnight and benefit from TOU metering at around 9 cents/kWh which takes the S around 3 miles (give or take), or 3 cents a mile for fuel. Drive the Model S 12,000 miles per year at a saving of nine cents per mile over our Mini Cooper S and that's $1,080 saved.

Not that a Mini Cooper and a Model S are comparable cars. And not that saving money on fuel was the primary motivation to buy a Model S. But the numbers do add up and it's not "false advertising" by any means.

My $0.02 takes me 2/3 of a mile in the Model S.

tes-s | 12. oktober 2015

They have full disclosure on their calculations. Everyone will be different.

PeterPlt | 12. oktober 2015

Yep. Picking nits.

Son of a Gunn | 12. oktober 2015

You can't generalize like that. There are many owners in expensive California with time-of-use savings. Even if you take a US average, $ per mile is still way cheaper using electricity than hydrocarbons. Not sure where you're coming from.

Son of a Gunn | 12. oktober 2015

Above comment was directed to OP.

@overthewoods broke it down nicely.

david | 12. oktober 2015

Why not throw that in as a "trump" card last instead of first?

Again, not too many if any, people spending $100,000.00 on one car are doing so to save gas money.

overthewoods | 12. oktober 2015

@david ... and your point is what, exactly? Do you know how the FTC defines false advertising or deceptive trade practices? Tesla makes a FULL DISCLOSURE of their calculations. So what if you, me, or anyone else doesn't find the gas savings meaningful? This is not false advertising!

And you "mentioned this before." Keep your Prius and don't buy a Tesla if you don't like the way the product is described or depicted on the website. Vote with your dollars and teach Tesla's marketers a lesson.

Son of a Gunn | 12. oktober 2015

I disagree with that, too. Do you think wealthy people are flippant with their money that they don't care to save $3000 a year on gas? Many become well-off by being frugal.

buickguy | 12. oktober 2015

I'm in California and I get much better "fuel" savings than advertised by Tesla. Everyone is different.

AmpedRealtor | 12. oktober 2015

Oh please...

JiveMiguel | 12. oktober 2015

A nit is a louse egg - no wonder people pick them!

david | 12. oktober 2015

@overthewoods

You have a way with words. No need to get personal or better before you start seeing red, take a deep breath and read my post a few times.

I plan on keeping my Prius for the next year and then giving it to one of my kids or a cousin. Either way I doubt I will teach Tesla any lesson about anything whether or not I buy one of their cars. That is not my intention. I am offering one man's opinion as you do. And I am not saying anything new according to my Tesla rep in White Plains, NY. Even he is of the same opinion.

My bet is that either way Tesla wants my business and I would bet that as part of the "Tesla Community" they would want you as an owner to act in a manner that would promote sales instead of discouraging them.

jinx | 12. oktober 2015

I am in Ohio, and I do get better fuel Savings than advertised. My Town & Country Van was my primary car before getting a Model S. I kept a spreadsheet of of all my Gas Spend for six months before getting the Tesla.

Prior to the Van, I had 4.8 BMW X5 w/ 3rd Row, that required premium fuel, one month I spent over $450.00 on Gas alone and Averaged about $300 per month. (Gas was more expensive about 3 years ago).

I still have my Van and now only use one tank of gas per month, which I get at about 60% off using fuel perks. (Still have to drive van when taking kids and their friends places).

Bighorn | 12. oktober 2015

When I first got the S, I think I was paying about 1/7 of what gas would cost for the 540. With the precipitous decline in gas prices, it's probably closer to 1/4. Plenty of savings here and quite appreciated. Super true in Europe with gas prices of 5-10 bucks a gallon.

carlk | 12. oktober 2015

@david I have PG&E TOU EV rate plan and charge my S at off pear hours for ~10c/kWH. That's about $0.035 per miles which would cost me 6x as much if I drive a ~15~20 mpg S class.

Again, not too many if any, people spending $100,000.00 on one car are doing so to save gas money.

It's save from burning gas as well as save gas money.

Haggy | 12. oktober 2015

I'm in California, and when I bought the car, premium gas was close to $4/gallon. In the past year, the MS was driven about 17,000 miles. My previous car used premium gas and got about 17 mpg. PG&E gives me EV rates at about 10 cents/kWh. A projected savings of $3400/year was realistic. I'm more likely to keep the car for a decade than I am to keep it for five years, so add the tax credits and rebates, and the comparison between the Model S and a car similar to my old one, assuming steady gasoline prices, put the cost on par with a much cheaper car.

I have a five year loan. Instead of looking at $44,000 based on a ten year ownership period, it was more fair to consider the loan payment plus fuel costs for various vehicles. That put a $90K configuration ($80K after tax incentives) on par with a $64K car. It also meant that once the car was paid off, the savings would continue, so the cost of ownership over the next five years would be substantially lower. Given a choice between getting a car for $64K that would have an additional $17K of expenses in years 6-10, the gas savings were quite real. The Tesla looked attractive compared to even $50K cars.

I replaced a car that was totaled so I can't say how long I would have owned it otherwise. But that car replaced one that I had for 16 years. So I see the Tesla as an economy car.

Prices for fuel did change quite a bit since I got my car. But they didn't change in a way that raised my costs. The savings may have become less dramatic, but in the long run gas prices will fluctuate more than electricity costs.

The cost savings for fuel when coupled with the tax savings made it well worth comparing an entry level Model S to anything else I was considering. I didn't end up with an entry level model, but if you rework my numbers with a base 70 as a starting point, a comparison to a car in the mid $30K might have been optimistic, but imagine if the Model 3 were out. When you consider tax incentives and fuel savings, it could be a better deal for some owners to get one rather than getting a brand new ICE for free. It was certainly enough to get me into the showroom without misleading me.

If you rework this with more current gas prices and assume that I keep the car for the same 16 years as my most recent non-totaled car, the savings still comes out to a very good one.

I'll see your $0.02 and raise you $30,000.

Captain_Zap | 12. oktober 2015

I can't remember the last time I saw gas prices THAT low.
Maybe diesel with a 500+ gallon discount.

sule | 12. oktober 2015

@david: Maybe people can spend $100,000.00 on a car precisely because they don't have to spend much of it on gas? Did you think of that?

Had I not bought my $100,000.00 Model S, I would have been driving a $60,000 ICE car. Yes, they would have cost me the same.

SbMD | 12. oktober 2015

@david - Cost of gas is only one part of the equation which brings one to the conclusion that they want to purchase an EV. I enjoy avoiding the gas stations and having a true zero emission vehicle.
Some people do spend that kind of money or more on gas. Just had this very conversation with a guy yesterday who drives a Jeep Cherokee and blows through gas money that makes $575 look like a gross underestimate.
In my part of the country and with cars I have driven, I am easily saving thousands in gas.

damonmath | 12. oktober 2015

I live in So Cal and indeed bought my Model S to save money. My current vehicle is a 2010 E550 coupe. My commute is over 80 miles per day in stop and go freeway traffic. I bought my E class used for just under 40k. Apples to apples (comparing payment, tires, maintenance, oil/no oil, gas/no gas) I save an average of $260/month driving my 98k Tesla versus my 40k E class.

Bighorn | 12. oktober 2015

The calculation is based on saving $2000/yr on gas or $166.66 per month.

lesleymeister | 12. oktober 2015

@david: I believe that you are stuck in the trees, trouble seeing the forest. Tesla has a mission which is nicely summed up in Elon's first Tesla blog post below. Tesla is many things to the many people on this forum who own one; various factors have brought us to this tent. I think it's a smart business/advertising decision of Tesla to use all available arguments to support their vision. Gasoline savings is one of those factors, more important to some than others and more savings for some than others depending upon their pre-Tesla ICE. I won't name the other factors because there are many threads on this forum devoted to this idea. It sounds like for your needs that your road will meet Tesla's when Model 3 comes out. Sit tight and watch or jump right in now when the up front cost is more, but staying away from electric cars like these you will find yourself on the wrong side of history.

________________________________________________________

The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan (just between you and me)

Elon Musk, Co-Founder & CEO of Tesla Motors August 2, 2006
Background: My day job is running a space transportation company called SpaceX, but on the side I am the chairman of Tesla Motors and help formulate the business and product strategy with Martin and the rest of the team. I have also been Tesla Motor's primary funding source from when the company was just three people and a business plan.

As you know, the initial product of Tesla Motors is a high performance electric sports car called the Tesla Roadster. However, some readers may not be aware of the fact that our long term plan is to build a wide range of models, including affordably priced family cars. This is because the overarching purpose of Tesla Motors (and the reason I am funding the company) is to help expedite the move from a mine-and-burn hydrocarbon economy towards a solar electric economy, which I believe to be the primary, but not exclusive, sustainable solution.

Critical to making that happen is an electric car without compromises, which is why the Tesla Roadster is designed to beat a gasoline sports car like a Porsche or Ferrari in a head to head showdown. Then, over and above that fact, it has twice the energy efficiency of a Prius. Even so, some may question whether this actually does any good for the world. Are we really in need of another high performance sports car? Will it actually make a difference to global carbon emissions?

Well, the answers are no and not much. However, that misses the point, unless you understand the secret master plan alluded to above. Almost any new technology initially has high unit cost before it can be optimized and this is no less true for electric cars. The strategy of Tesla is to enter at the high end of the market, where customers are prepared to pay a premium, and then drive down market as fast as possible to higher unit volume and lower prices with each successive model.

Without giving away too much, I can say that the second model will be a sporty four door family car at roughly half the $89k price point of the Tesla Roadster and the third model will be even more affordable. In keeping with a fast growing technology company, all free cash flow is plowed back into R&D to drive down the costs and bring the follow on products to market as fast as possible. When someone buys the Tesla Roadster sports car, they are actually helping pay for development of the low cost family car.

Now I’d like to address two repeated arguments against electric vehicles — battery disposal and power plant emissions. The answer to the first is short and simple, the second requires a bit of math:

Batteries that are not toxic to the environment!
I wouldn’t recommend them as a dessert topping, but the Tesla Motors Lithium-Ion cells are not classified as hazardous and are landfill safe. However, dumping them in the trash would be throwing money away, since the battery pack can be sold to recycling companies (unsubsidized) at the end of its greater than 100,000-mile design life. Moreover, the battery isn’t dead at that point, it just has less range.

Power Plant Emissions aka “The Long Tailpipe”
(For a more detailed version of this argument, please see the white paper written by Martin and Marc.)

A common rebuttal to electric vehicles as a solution to carbon emissions is that they simply transfer the CO2 emissions to the power plant. The obvious counter is that one can develop grid electric power from a variety of means, many of which, like hydro, wind, geothermal, nuclear, solar, etc. involve no CO2 emissions. However, let’s assume for the moment that the electricity is generated from a hydrocarbon source like natural gas, the most popular fuel for new US power plants in recent years.

The H-System Combined Cycle Generator from General Electric is 60% efficient in turning natural gas into electricity. "Combined Cycle" is where the natural gas is burned to generate electricity and then the waste heat is used to create steam that powers a second generator. Natural gas recovery is 97.5% efficient, processing is also 97.5% efficient and then transmission efficiency over the electric grid is 92% on average. This gives us a well-to-electric-outlet efficiency of 97.5% x 97.5% x 60% x 92% = 52.5%.

Despite a body shape, tires and gearing aimed at high performance rather than peak efficiency, the Tesla Roadster requires 0.4 MJ per kilometer or, stated another way, will travel 2.53 km per mega-joule of electricity. The full cycle charge and discharge efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 86%, which means that for every 100 MJ of electricity used to charge the battery, about 86 MJ reaches the motor.

Bringing the math together, we get the final figure of merit of 2.53 km/MJ x 86% x 52.5% = 1.14 km/MJ. Let’s compare that to the Prius and a few other options normally considered energy efficient.

The fully considered well-to-wheel efficiency of a gasoline powered car is equal to the energy content of gasoline (34.3 MJ/liter) minus the refinement & transportation losses (18.3%), multiplied by the miles per gallon or km per liter. The Prius at an EPA rated 55 mpg therefore has an energy efficiency of 0.56 km/MJ. This is actually an excellent number compared with a “normal” car like the Toyota Camry at 0.28 km/MJ.

Note the term hybrid as applied to cars currently on the road is a misnomer. They are really just gasoline powered cars with a little battery assistance and, unless you are one of the handful who have an aftermarket hack, the little battery has to be charged from the gasoline engine. Therefore, they can be considered simply as slightly more efficient gasoline powered cars. If the EPA certified mileage is 55 mpg, then it is indistinguishable from a non-hybrid that achieves 55 mpg. As a friend of mine says, a world 100% full of Prius drivers is still 100% addicted to oil.

The CO2 content of any given source fuel is well understood. Natural gas is 14.4 grams of carbon per mega-joule and oil is 19.9 grams of carbon per mega-joule. Applying those carbon content levels to the vehicle efficiencies, including as a reference the Honda combusted natural gas and Honda fuel cell natural gas vehicles, the hands down winner is pure electric:

Car Energy Source CO2 Content Efficiency CO2 Emissions
Honda CNG Natural Gas 14.4 g/MJ 0.32 km/MJ 45.0 g/km
Honda FCX Nat Gas-Fuel Cell 14.4 g/MJ 0.35 km/MJ 41.1 g/km
Toyota Prius Oil 19.9 g/MJ 0.56 km/MJ 35.8 g/km
Tesla Roadster Nat Gas-Electric 14.4 g/MJ 1.14 km/MJ 12.6 g/km

The Tesla Roadster still wins by a hefty margin if you assume the average CO2 per joule of US power production. The higher CO2 content of coal compared to natural gas is offset by the negligible CO2 content of hydro, nuclear, geothermal, wind, solar, etc. The exact power production mixture varies from one part of the country to another and is changing over time, so natural gas is used here as a fixed yardstick.

Becoming Energy Positive
I should mention that Tesla Motors will be co-marketing sustainable energy products from other companies along with the car. For example, among other choices, we will be offering a modestly sized and priced solar panel from SolarCity, a photovoltaics company (where I am also the principal financier). This system can be installed on your roof in an out of the way location, because of its small size, or set up as a carport and will generate about 50 miles per day of electricity.

If you travel less than 350 miles per week, you will therefore be “energy positive” with respect to your personal transportation. This is a step beyond conserving or even nullifying your use of energy for transport – you will actually be putting more energy back into the system than you consume in transportation! So, in short, the master plan is:

Build sports car
Use that money to build an affordable car
Use that money to build an even more affordable car
While doing above, also provide zero emission electric power generation options
Don't tell anyone.

renwo S alset | 12. oktober 2015

I save money by stealing all my electricity from a little old ladies garage, I pickup a few extra dollars hauling trash in all the extra storage space and I get a little extra for hauling all my friends to the soup kitchen. Who says people who spend $100K on a car don't care about gas costs.

ST70 | 12. oktober 2015

@david- go away with your idiotic reasoning....btw I've never paid for electricity yet...OK I've spent $4 on Chargepoint a few times to check it out. I get all my free electricity plugging into work and the superchargers...

laykutsu1 | 12. oktober 2015

Yes... I am sure a lot of owners care about gas cost...
Currently P85D and previous comparable vehicle is E63...which
is a great car but cost a lot for maintaining and gas (23mpg high way and 16~17 local, 19mpg lifetime) and thats on the high side..
my brother in law and my cousin gets 12~14mpg...and I DO care about gas cost....

And no... P85D is not the same as prius... they are not competitors.. its competes with E63, M5, RS7 or similar vehicle with roughly same power or 0-60 or quarter mile...

Sudre_ | 12. oktober 2015

I bought a 72K Tesla Model S which was a 65K car after the tax credit. SO that whole 100,000 dollar car thing is bulls... I have saved around 3K in the almost three years of ownership on fuel alone.

I was going to purchase a 50-60K price range ICE anyway so right now I am at a break even point in cost and I haven't had to make any real sacrifices either.

SO no it's not false advertising. It is very good advertising. By reading Tesla's 'fine print' a buyer can easily adjust Tesla's numbers to their utility and figure out if it brings the monthly car payment into their price range. For me it did. From this point on the car now become cheaper than the car I was going to buy.

I just recently hit about 36K miles.
My average wh/m is 317 (last I looked)
That's 11,412kW used over the three years
My utility averages 10 cent per kW.
The cost for power was 1,142.20
That cost is well exaggerated because I get free charging at Superchargers and had free charging for two of those years at work but for now lets just pretend free charging doesn't exist.

The gas cars I was looking at were well under 30 mpg. More like 22 city, 30 highway (which I know is a lie) and 26 combines.
Using the combined number that means I would have used 1384 gallons of gas.
We all know gas prices have been much higher than 2.50 and that they will go right back up shortly but using that price like that's what it's been forever.... 3516.92 saved.

Net savings for me 2374.72.
Mind you that number is actually really low because of several reasons stated above. Plus for example the Ford Mustang (as an example) web page says to expect to spend at least 1350-1850 a year on fuel.

If a Prius is what you like then stay away from a Tesla. Why do people who like smaller much cheaper cars keep wanting to buy a much larger and expensive luxury car? It is not the car for them. The Model 3 will be a much better fit. My wife doesn't have a Tesla yet because the S is just to large for her.

david when you decide it's time to purchase a 50K+ car come back and lets talk fuel savings. That's when you will discover that the car payment for a 50-60K car is the same as a base model S after 3 years of fuel saving.

A Prius is between 20-30K... so the closes electric matching car you are looking to compare to should be a Nissan Leaf, for example.

renwo S alset | 12. oktober 2015

@david. and would you please not drive so damn slow in the fast lane.

overthewoods | 12. oktober 2015

@david My breathing is just fine here, chronically low blood pressure, and I'm red/green colorblind.

I have read and reread the OP. You accuse the company of deceptive behavior, and use a particular term with a very specific meaning in the thread title. Reposting a self-described nit-picking observation about Tesla's marketing verges on troll-like behavior, in my opinion.

Tesla cars are not for everyone. Someone who would repeatedly nit-pick the marketing on the website might have a tough time finding satisfaction with the final product as well.

And as consumers, we vote with our dollars every day by the choices we make whether you like to think that way or not.

Of course, your mileage may vary.

tom168 | 12. oktober 2015

@David: Please keep your Prius. You have been using the gas expense of the Prius to justify Model S is not as economical as it claims. To be fair, one has to compare Model S with at least a Mercedes E class in terms of comfort level and size. I owned both a Prius and E320 prior to the model S. I disposed the Prius once I got the 70D. After 5 months, I feel very comfortable with EV and will dispose the E320 eventually. I toured the factory when I picked up the car, I felt I made the right decision as my purchase will in part support our economy.

Take the plunge-- Life is too short to sit on the sideline.

85DBlue | 12. oktober 2015

ELON no one dare do to this trick only he can do this.

Please stop it ELON the home page add looks like it is useful to buy the wife in to buy a expensive car.

AoneOne | 12. oktober 2015

@david: You're not the first to pick this particular nit but, after observing Tesla over the past three year, I've concluded that this is a deliberate and important part of their presentation of the car.

Here's my understanding: When buying an ICE car, the fuel cost comparison is simple and almost automatic, based on a comparison of MPG with adjustments for fuel grade/type. Tesla loses the advantage of this familiarity and so needs to force the issue by bringing the fuel savings directly into the pricing page. One can quibble with the basis of their comparison, but it's hardly unexpected that they chose a comparison that puts them in a good light without being absurd.

In your case, Tesla got you to perform the calculation for yourself. I'd say they accomplished their goal, at the real but acceptably small cost of annoying those who felt potentially misled.

With your analytical bent, you might want to review some of the TCO models that have been discussed at http://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/simple-total-cost-ownership-model... and elsewhere.

jordanrichard | 12. oktober 2015

Buying a Prius is not cost effective either. Buying any new car is not cost effective. Even if the entire drivetrain in the car previous to the Prius, blew up, it would have been cheaper to replace it than what your Prius cost.

AmpedRealtor | 12. oktober 2015

My previous car was a Prius so my gasoline cost savings are small. However, that is not a fair comparison. A Model S should be judged against other vehicles in the same class, many of which cannot do better than 20-25 MPG. To be fair, if I wasn't buying a Model S I would have spent half as much on a Lexus hybrid sedan.

luckyluciano | 12. oktober 2015

I bought a P85D. It was down either the CLS AmgS 6.3 and the P85D. Both cost about $145,000 here. YES, one of the deciding factors was the gas savings. SO YES I BOUGHT A TESLA/$100,000 car to save on gas.

No offence...I WOULD NEVER WANT TO DRIVE A PRIUS! Let alone compare it to a Tesla. lol.

Dave you are dead wrong as far as I go.

Haggy | 12. oktober 2015

Buying a Prius is not cost effective either. Buying any new car is not cost effective.

It depends on your situation, whether you are replacing a car, or whether you simply need to get a car. I never had a Prius, but the feeling I got when they came out is that people were willing to pay more than they would for a car with comparable features sans-hybrid, because the cost of operation would make up for it. The Model S competes well with cars in its price range even if you don't account for the price of fuel. The cost of energy for a Model S doesn't make up for overpaying for the car. It allows you to get much more car for the money. If the cost savings were marginal, there might not be many people who would buy a Tesla for $90K instead of an ICE for $60K. But there would be plenty who would buy a Tesla for $90K instead of a different car for $90K.

If you want to save money, you need to look at the big picture, and very often getting a much cheaper car works better than getting a fuel efficient one. My dad bought a 1973 Lincoln for about $2K-$3K back in 1975 during the gas crisis when nobody wanted such a fuel inefficient car. There was no way the cost of gas would ever add up to enough that it would have been cheaper to get something that got twice the gas mileage. If it's simply a matter of spending as little as possible, buying something used with great gas mileage is the way to go. Buy a Tesla if you want a great car for the cost of a good one.

David N | 12. oktober 2015

david,
"It puts me off saying this on the "home page". I don't know too many people ponying up $100,000.00 whose primary intention is to save a few $$$ on gasoline and oil changes."

By your statement, it leads me to believe you need to study Elon and Tesla a bit more. Just because the "Home Page" is not to your liking doesn't mean much. If the same info was on a different page then others would complain "why isn't this on the home page". So your whole reason for the post in a bit meaningless.
Spend some time on youtube listening to interviews/talks with Elon Musk and also Jb Straubel.
you will learn their goals, Teslas mission. I don't think you'll find them talking about "saving money by not buying gas". You'll find deep underlying conviction to change the way we look/percieve transportation and energy use. A recent article from a former Tesla employees reiterated the very same mission that Elon, JB and Tesla have been trying to preach. The former employee stated that the employees at Tesla are sincerely and deeply committed to being part of this task to change "us" in the way we use energy.To make the world a better planet.
I'm not to sure you'll find that level of commitment at any other auto manufactures employees.
So back to your original post about people spending 100,000 to save a few bucks at the pump. It is a true statement, you probably do not know anyone who did that. I personally don't know of anyone either. But I understand what they're doing and I applaud them and will continue to support them as they face many obstacles placed in their way. Naysayers are all over the place. Why not come on over to the other side.
There is an old saying. "Lead, follow or get the hell out of the way."

Rchop0 | 12. oktober 2015

Huge nit... a prius will never drive like a model S and therefore shouldn't be compared to one

mrspaghetti | 12. oktober 2015

@david

It you know it is nitpicking then why do it?

Tropopause | 12. oktober 2015

David,

You had another thread with essentially the same arguments.

trixiew | 12. oktober 2015

@David

If you pick it, it will never heal.

hcwhy | 12. oktober 2015

David made it quite clear that this was his reaction to "gas savings"...he never even implied that it was some sort of nefarious plot on Tesla's part. I can see trying to show him a more positive perspective on why Tesla was doing this, but I don't see any need to attack the guy for expressing his honest feelings about the subject. With two huge variables....the MPG of the car the buyer might be driving instead of the Tesla and the future price of fuel, the fuel savings can only be an educated guess at best. I came to Tesla from a VW Golf TDI (yeah, one of the "dirty" diesels). When I was ordering my car the rep. at Tesla had some tables to figure out how much I was likely to save...depending on the price of diesel. That was more accurate than using some generic car, but the other variable was the future price of fuel and neither of us saw fuel prices being what they are today....therefore our figures were way off. (this was almost two years ago).

hcwhy | 12. oktober 2015

I was only reading the body of his post...I hadn't noticed the banner. "False advertising" is a bit provocative.

david | 13. oktober 2015

Obviously touched [quite] a few nerves here.
I did not intend to create any ill winds here, and sorry if I did.

Appreciated all the positive comments.

Best as always,
David

Jacqueline.gerhart | 13. oktober 2015

@david: Last weekend my cousin who is a finance manager for an ICE dealership pointed this (the built in gas savings on the Tesla site) out to me. He felt it was false advertising. I sort of understand his point of view. It's like advertising a diesel car in Califonia and listing the final price after savings over regular gas. However Tesla does make this very clear on their website and are not deceiving customers. I think AoneA says it best with his post at the beginning of this page. For what it's worth, my cousin is actually planning to buy a Model X in 1-2 years, so he obviously doesn't think it's a big dealin spite of bringing this up to me.

david | 13. oktober 2015

@mastaace

Thank you for your response. I do not want to do a screen capture and post it but if you look at the page it does not put a disclaimer on the page itself. In fact there is not even an asterisk on it. When you click the order button you can gain further information. The "reported" gas savings is calculated using $3.90 a gallon. The NATIONAL average cost per gallon is $2.30 today. Quick math - that is a 70% difference.

I think the LAST time the national price of gasoline was $3.90 was in 2012.

So it is what it is. In my opinion it is wrong for Tesla to have that on their home page and use it as math when calculating the cost of "gas savings". At the least they should use accurate numbers.

david | 13. oktober 2015

Furthermore, just take making the average price one dollar less to $2.90 a gallon. Average it as they do to 12,500 miles per year or 625 gallons per year. Take five years is 3125 gallons. That is a difference of $3,125 over their stated savings, or under. About one third of advertised savings.

And I wont comment on using Premium gas instead of just using the national average.

ST70 | 13. oktober 2015

@david- OK you've convinced me I need a Prius...

david | 13. oktober 2015

@ST70

Perhaps just a comment related to my points above?

You are probably well aware of this link found deep within the Prius's web pages:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/savemoney.shtml

It is in my opinion a more accurate way for a customer to figure out their potential savings. It looks as though they use the current national average price per gallon of gasoline.

Bighorn | 13. oktober 2015

David
Tesla's biggest market is experiencing gas prices north of $3 a gallon in many cities. Premium fuel, which obviously costs more, is required for many of the Model S's comps.

AmpedRealtor | 13. oktober 2015

It's impossible to go through with the sale without having a complete picture of what you are paying. It's up to you to determine savings, if any. What Tesla provides is a guideline. You don't agree with how they are presenting this information, but your disagreement does not make it misleading.

Pages