←back to thread

1329 points kwindla | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.402s | source
Show context
guywithahat ◴[] No.43798166[source]
The issue with this is they claim the cost savings came from not having a screen and other silly features, but that’s not where money is spent.

The real cost savings came a tiny, 150 mile battery. It could easily be <100 miles loaded up after a few years of use, which means there are very few use cases for this truck, and it certainly doesn’t make sense without the tax credit. Cool idea, but there’s no getting around the price of batteries

replies(4): >>43798328 #>>43798336 #>>43798650 #>>43801549 #
ceejayoz ◴[] No.43798328[source]
There are plenty of use cases for a ~100 mile truck.
replies(3): >>43798532 #>>43798579 #>>43798972 #
DangitBobby ◴[] No.43798972[source]
Right, but it needs to be competitive with ICE cars that travel several hundred miles per tank and fill up in minutes. Literally 0 of my friends have been willing to transition to electric due primarily to range anxiety, and that's for vehicles that achieve over 200 miles per charge. I drive an EV and even I would simply never, ever consider this vehicle based on the range.
replies(3): >>43799084 #>>43799411 #>>43799698 #
1. ceejayoz ◴[] No.43799084[source]
I’d want one of these for in-town stuff, which is 90% of my driving.
replies(1): >>43805822 #
2. DangitBobby ◴[] No.43805822[source]
I'm just saying, many people aren't going to buy an EV until they see it as a strict upgrade over the ICE alternative.