The Unofficial State Cars of America

[bill25]

This is... Disappointing at best?

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a1 ... ate=061116

Loved cars by state.

I guess New England loves Volvo. I may have to move.

I can't go south because apparently that is Kia and 7 Series territory. West is Dodge Caravan land (What???). A little further mid-west is Big truck and SUV stuff, that is the best so far... More west is Fiat 500, Smart and Leaf territory.

Alaska has the WRX. Aside from the Jag, that is probably the best car on here performance wise.

I wonder what this map would have looked like through the decades.

It is also kind of odd to me with all of the performance available, and low gas prices, that this is where we are at.

[Adam]

It is also kind of odd to me with all of the performance available, and low gas prices, that this is where we are at.

Turns our normal people don't care about that. They just want to buy the illusion of success and trendiness.

[bill25]

While the aging baby boom generation inspired the modern demand for classic-type American Muscle cars, the consumer market is much more diverse than it was in the 1960s and 1970s. Looking at modern muscle as a social trend, Ford and GM are the "innovators," followed by baby boom males in their 50s as "early adopters." The big bulge or "early majority" in the modern muscle movement comes from the men in their teens and early 20s. For these non-baby boomer consumers, the "cool" image is key.[60] In the 1960s "a car was not quite a car unless punching the accelerator resulted in screaming tires and the landscape blurring around you…" according to Brent Staples of The New York Times. Fuel was cheap and the staple of drag racing counterculture was to be fast and loud. Now being “cool,” fuel efficient, and cost effective is all a part of the package. Instead of fuel guzzling V8 engines, you see V6 or turbocharged I4 models.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_car

Kind of depressing, but it is true. Even though these new cars are great, the car culture has changed. Cool is efficient and boring A to B vehicles. I kind of think this has a lot to do with society as a whole being very uptight. People were more outgoing and I think, had more fun back then. Now, people have other stuff to do.

[Adam]

Cool is efficient and boring A to B vehicles. I kind of think this has a lot to do with society as a whole being very uptight. People were more outgoing and I think, had more fun back then. Now, people have other stuff to do.

I wonder how electric cars will play into this. They are "cool and efficient", but make a lot of torque. Teslas are pretty fast (compared to a Camry), but are driven by people who recently moved up from a Prius or Hybrid Highlander or some crap. Injecting large amounts of power into vehicles that people who don't care about power are buying could be very interesting in a few years.

[Bob]

One thing I find interesting about many Tesla Model S owners is that they would not have purchased any other car in that price range or vehicle class. This may only be a temporary anomaly as lower cost high range EVs are coming soon (Bolt, Model 3, 60 kwh Leaf, etc), but it will be interesting to see what happens. I wonder if this demographic of people who have the means to purchase an $80-100k car but chose not to in the past will discover they like it or will they revert back to buying cheaper cars as EVs that work for them become available at a lower price point?

[kevm14]

Amusingly, what you're really asking is this Tesla thing just the tip of the iceberg or is it a bubble as EVs quickly move into commodity territory for the vast majority of consumers (like ICE cars are now)? Or is Tesla going to be a niche/luxury segment, the same way that the Germans own the high end car segment? They may have a ton of mindshare but ramping to mass volumes may ultimately not be where they decide to go.

[Bob]

Yeah, I guess you could put it that way too. I don't think Tesla's Model S sales volume really has much room to grow (aside from maybe selling in new markets) since the prospective buyers for cars in that price range are relatively limited in numbers. Tesla obviously sees this and that's why they are launching lower cost cars. I think the commoditization of EVs will be good for the market as a whole and certainly good for affordability.

[kevm14]

Agree. But I think it won't be good for Tesla. Sarcasm not intended: if Tesla can't figure out profits for a luxury item, I have no faith that they can pull it off in low-margin high-volume. Not to mention the production risk itself. The investor would ask: is any of this priced into the stock or are people thinking they are totally gonna make waves even in the not-that-far-away commodity EV market?

[Bob]

Things I think Tesla has going for it in the commodity EV market:

- Economy of scale for battery pricing. I think Tesla's $/kwh cost for cells is going to be less than GM's or Nissan's assuming gigafactory starts up as planned. Seems to be on track so far.
- Attractive design. The Model 3, at least in concept form, is far better looking than the Bolt. The next gen Leaf has potential to give it a run for its money, but will likely be sanitized to conform to corporate Nissan appearance.
- Premium nameplate. I think people will have an easier time stomaching a $40k pricetag on a Tesla than a Nissan or Chevy. I'm not saying this is right or logical, just that this is how buyers will behave. Also, in their #1 sales state, California, Tesla has major prestige.
- Performance. The Model 3 should be sportier and faster than the Bolt or Leaf, with high performance versions available (so far, it does not appear that GM or Nissan will offer a high performance Bolt or Leaf). I am not sure this matters to their target market, but it's something.

Things I think Tesla has working against it in the commodity EV market:

- Reliability. I think the reliability of the Nissan and GM competition will be far better than the Model 3. Turns out making cars isn't easy and Nissan and GM have a lot more experience doing it.
- Economy of scale for all vehicle components other than batteries. Tesla just doesn't have the purchasing leverage that GM and Nissan have.


Will the positives be enough for Tesla to win and be sustainable long-term? Only time will tell.

[kevm14]

- Economy of scale for battery pricing. I think Tesla's $/kwh cost for cells is going to be less than GM's or Nissan's assuming gigafactory starts up as planned. Seems to be on track so far.
- Attractive design. The Model 3, at least in concept form, is far better looking than the Bolt. The next gen Leaf has potential to give it a run for its money, but will likely be sanitized to conform to corporate Nissan appearance.
- Premium nameplate. I think people will have an easier time stomaching a $40k pricetag on a Tesla than a Nissan or Chevy. I'm not saying this is right or logical, just that this is how buyers will behave. Also, in their #1 sales state, California, Tesla has major prestige.
- Performance. The Model 3 should be sportier and faster than the Bolt or Leaf, with high performance versions available (so far, it does not appear that GM or Nissan will offer a high performance Bolt or Leaf). I am not sure this matters to their target market, but it's something.

Three of these are things they already have. The first one is an actual supply chain advantage.

- Reliability. I think the reliability of the Nissan and GM competition will be far better than the Model 3. Turns out making cars isn't easy and Nissan and GM have a lot more experience doing it.
- Economy of scale for all vehicle components other than batteries. Tesla just doesn't have the purchasing leverage that GM and Nissan have.

Will the positives be enough for Tesla to win and be sustainable long-term? Only time will tell.

I think these two are big in a truly commodity market.