In China, they refer to HEVs, EREVs, PHEVs, and BEVs as “new energy vehicles,” or NEVs. The idea, in addition to simplifying the acronym soup, is to separate traditional gas-powered cars from everything else. Here in the United States, some automakers use the term “electrified” to cover basically anything that has an electric motor driving the wheels, even if it also has a gas-fueled engine.
For the purposes of today’s Morning Dump, and for getting a headline people will read, I’m going to point out that more than 1-in-5 new cars sold in America were “electrified,” and we’re getting awfully close to the point where it’s 1-in-4 cars. Can it last, though?
More cars could end up being electrified if Tesla builds a cheaper car, as many have been begging it to do. Unfortunately for people hoping for an all-new vehicle, the early indications are the vehicle will be more like a decontented Model 3/Model Y. Tesla is unique in some ways, but also not at all unique, which is why it’s at risk of tariff-related slowdowns just like any other company. Even OEMs that don’t sell in the United States are worried.
And, finally, Ford is going to save some money on executive bonuses as leadership didn’t hit quality goals for the year. I’ll explain why that’s sort of encouraging.
Hybrids And EV Sales Are Growing
I mentioned earlier this week that Tesla was absolutely taking it in the shorts when it comes to sales lately, both figuratively and literally, as anyone shorting Tesla this week has probably done well. The company doesn’t release monthly sales data, so we have to go by registration data, which lags.
The very nice folks at S&P Global Mobility sent me the full series of data, and it’s quite interesting. Right off the bat, we can see that Tesla’s market share dropped to 42% from 54% the year before. There was some inevitability to this due to competition, but you might not expect year-over-year sales to drop for the brand while they’re increasing for almost everyone else.
Rivian actually led the losers in January, dropping 21.6% year-over-year, compared to a decrease of 10.9% for Tesla, 6.9% for Kia, and 5.2% for Hyundai. Looking at the other big brands, pretty much everyone else is up by large amounts. Ford grew back into the #2 spot with a 54.8% year-over-year increase, followed by Cadillac (37.5%), and Chevrolet (36.4%). Technically, Volkswagen was up the most at 163.3%, but the company had a stop sale last year on its only EV so that doesn’t exactly count.
Looking model-by-model, the Model Y was still America’s most popular EV, albeit way down. The Model 3 grew in popularity, selling almost 14,000 units. Is the cheaper Model 3 cannibalizing Model Y sales or is this just a factory switchover issue? Or both? My guess is both, but we’re going to need more than one month to figure that out definitively.
The Mustang Mach-E was way up year-over-year at 146.8%, besting the ID.4, which barely stayed ahead of the popular Honda Prologue. So that’s the big data. What I’m a little more interested in this morning, though, is the overall mix of fuel types, as seen above.
For all of last year, solely gas-powered cars dropped to their lowest take rate since probably the end of the 19th century, with about 75.4% overall, though ICE in total was a little higher due to diesel and flex-fuel (ethanol). BEVs were at 8.1% and hybrids were at 12.1% of new car market share.
In the first month of the year, EVs were strong at 8.4% of the overall new car market, with hybrids up to a strong 13.7%. With more and more automakers offering hybrids, I don’t think anyone suspects regular hybrid sales will drop. PHEVs and EVs? That’s a little harder to predict.
If the up-to $7,500 tax credit enacted by President Biden is removed, EV sales could drop by 30% in 2027 and up to 40% off by 2030 according to a recent study from Princeton University. A lot of this has to do not only with overall pricing, but with the ability of companies to lease electric cars if they don’t qualify for tax credits the normal way. This would also have an impact on the construction of battery and car plants in the United States.
From one perspective, the fact that these cars need a tax break to be popular shows that they’re not competitive on their own in the way that, say, hybrids are. It’s a “new” technology and the goal was to jumpstart production in North America to better compete with China, which seemed to be happening.
It’s not clear if President Trump has the votes to remove the Inflation Reduction Act, but nothing the Democrats in Congress have done lately indicates that the party’s leadership in the Senate has any discernible backbone, so it’s very possible.
Is The ‘Cheap’ Tesla Just Going To Be A Decontented Car?
I’ll just get this out of the way immediately. It’s possible that nothing Tesla does is going to help the company if a large portion of its usual buyers get sick of the CEO. It’s also possible, like with just about everything in modern life, people will just move on. A just-released poll by Quinnipiac University (who will lose to the mighty Gaels of Iona today) shows that common ground might be hard to find, but a bunch of Americans agree they don’t like Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (only 36% approval). Worse for Musk, more than half of Americans think that Elon Musk and DOGE are hurting the country.
Would you buy a car from someone you think is actively harming the country? That aside, Elon Musk once touted the idea of a cheaper Tesla, though that was then rumored to be shelved last year. In October of last year, Musk said the idea of building a $25,000 car with a steering wheel “would be silly.”
Now it’s being reported by Reuters that there is a cheaper car coming, but it’s most likely a decontented Model 3/Model Y that can be built on existing production lines (which aren’t being fully utilized).
The U.S. electric vehicle maker is developing the model under a project codenamed “E41” and will build it using existing production lines, the people said. Mass production will begin at its biggest factory by output in 2026, said two of the people.
The car will be smaller and cost at least 20% less to produce than the refreshed Model Y launched late last year, two of them said. The Model Y, a mid-sized SUV crossover, retails from 263,500 yuan ($36,351).
The Shanghai output will be mainly sold in China to defend market share, one of the people said. The model will also be produced in Europe and North America, the person said, without providing a time frame.
Tesla really missed out by not calling it E-40, right? This is what happens when you leave California.
What does “smaller” mean in this context? Fewer seats? Actually smaller? Here’s what Chinese tech site 36Kr had to say:
People familiar with the matter told 36Kr that the new model is a “lower – priced Model Y”. Compared with the currently sold Model Y, there are basically no major changes in parts such as the battery, power system, and chassis of the new car.
“It is developed through the depop method,” revealed the person familiar with the matter. Depop is an internal development concept at Tesla, which means to quickly launch products by simplifying configurations while keeping the main functions unchanged.
Conceptually, a cheaper Model Y without all the fancy materials and stuff is a good idea. We’re in support of more affordable cars that are not overburdened by features people rarely use. But 20% off is not a $25,000 car. Maybe, maybe it’s a $35,000 car, or $34,420.69 because this is Elon Musk’s plan. [Ed Note: I don’t think sharing a common platform is bad, especially given how similar EV platforms are to one another. A smaller Model Y isn’t a bad thing so long as the new model offers some uniqueness. -DT].
The big questions are:
- Tesla’s margins are falling, will this hurt them even more?
- Will this be enough to overcome the competition?
- Will the market be excited by something that looks like a smaller Model Y?
I just don’t see the Model Y Play moving the market as strongly as a purpose-built, $25,000 car.
No Automaker Seems Happy About Tariffs
Like Jason when he starts talking about the Coptic Pope, no one is really quite sure where a trade war will go, but everyone is a little worried. BMW this week said they didn’t expect tariffs to last long, but expected to take a roughly $1 billion hit from them.
Even Škoda, which doesn’t even sell cars here, is worried, as CEO Klaus Zellmer said earlier today to Bloomberg:
The effect of US tariffs would be “indirect” as Skoda’s suppliers are based around the world and levies hitting them would raise costs and weigh on margins, the brand’s Chief Executive Officer Klaus Zellmer said Friday.
“If China can’t sell anything in America they will look for other avenues to pursue their growth ambitions — and of course that’s Europe,” Zellmer said in an interview with Bloomberg Television. Competition in its main sales region is increasing as a result, he added.
Using tariffs to protect and grow homegrown industries isn’t necessarily a faulty concept, although global trade in the 21st century is nothing like it was before containerization of goods was standardized. If you shut off one market, you end up impacting every other market. If Chinese suppliers can’t sell to the United States, then they’ll just look to Europe. Worse, if you’re, say, an American cattle producer, and can’t sell to China over a long enough time period, then, perhaps, your customers will find another source of beef.
Also, there’s just straight up retaliation. Tesla, in a letter to the US trade rep, complained that the company could be particularly singled out for retaliatory tariffs if a trade war continues.
Ford Execs Lose Some Bonus Over Quality Issues
Ford CEO Jim Farley will only get $24,861,866 in compensation for 2024, down from $26,470,033 in 2023 according to recent filings with the SEC. The reason, largely, is that Ford hasn’t hit the goals it set for itself to improve quality.
Farley was Ford’s biggest individual earning executive last year, but because his compensation is largely dependent on how the company performs, his total compensation declined year over year. Last year, Ford changed how it rewards executives, tying bonus payments to yearly performance rather than long-term focus. Farley said last year that executives were still getting bonuses despite disappointing performance, so he changed the practice.
In the filing, the company praised Farley for delivering solid financial results and revenues, recruiting top talent, driving a diversified product strategy, advancing a multibillion-dollar turnaround of Ford’s international operations, and building Ford’s software and services business. But it said he fell short on meeting quality improvement goals and cost-cutting targets.
As the article points out, this was mostly Farley’s own doing. Honestly, watching a CEO take some responsibility for a company’s problems is unfortunately a refreshing change from the usual. By comparison, ousted Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares will probably end up with more money than Farley despite his company’s massive underperformance. Accountability, what a concept!
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
I am not going to play the song-that-shall-not-be-named because I know I’m going to get into trouble with a decent percentage of the readership here if I do, even if I think it is indeed a remarkable achievement in pop music. Instead, here’s Carly Rae Jepsen singing her not-quite-meteoric hit “I Really Like You” in the video… starring Tom Hanks walking around SoHo. What?
The Pop Question
What car needs a super decontented version?
Top Photo: S&P, Ford, Hyundai
Teslas don’t even have turn signal stalks anymore right? What fancy stuff are they cutting out to save money? Seats?
Actually they brought back the stalks back on the new Model Y… not that it really matters as long as Elon Musk is involved with the company.
Valid
No dashboard, just vents, a yoke and a screen. Oh also VW’s two window switches to control eveything. Call it neo minimalism.
Whats funny I was about to say it will sell like hotcakes but the people who would buy it absolute abhor Elon now.
RIP Tesla
Replace the center screen with a 7-inch monochrome display.
No screen. HUD for speed and range. Everything is voice activated.
Screens are mandatory in the USA and other major markets that require a backup camera
Just put it in the rear view mirror. Grab it from the parts bin of chevy or Ford as they still make those.
You aren’t saving any money by putting the screen in the mirror. You are just making the product worse by removing the dash touchscreen.
The problem with removing content is that it doesn’t sell.
Why get a new penalty box when I can get a nice 3 year old car from the same dealership? Car purchases aren’t cheap, why not get something nice? Today’s cars last 15 years or so, and 3 years isn’t that bad when you think of it that way.
Back in the glory days of crapcans, 3 year old cars may or may not run a week later, so getting a cheap new car that had a chance of outlasting the battery was a good play. But not today.
Which is why the loss leader econoboxes are gone today. Automakers found out it was easier and more profitable to sell entry level buyers a CPO used car that came off lease than to build low or no margin penalty boxes
And there are economies of scale. You don’t have to design a door for both power windows and roll up ones or power door locks and push button ones. You can use a single wiring harness for all the cars, because they all have power seats and seat heaters.
There’s a TON of R&D that is behind the scenes on about every part in a car. Like they roll up and down windows thousands upon thousands of times to make sure the systems work right before they put in a car. Making crank windows and going through the testing to support a small number of crack up windows ends up costing more than just putting power windows in all of the cars.
It’s gotten to the point where some manufacturer are starting to sell you the exact same car, but with some features enabled or disabled based on software locks depending on your budget, because it’s cheaper to change the 1s and 0s than the physical parts of a vehicle.
Isn’t it possible that a Tesla that costs 20% less to build but is based on the same platform and uses many of the same components including the majority of the body could still be sold for 30%+ less and STILL be as or more profitable than the regular model if it’s done by just using the excess capacity on the existing production line which is how it’s likely shaping up to be?
The line will be far more efficient if it’s not constantly stopping and starting (even overnight) and paying three shifts NO overtime is usually cheaper than paying two shifts a lot of overtime or one shift some overtime and some doubletime. Equipment that just sits costs the same as equipment that is in use 100% of the time with the exception of some increased variable maintenance and repair costs. Basically it’s free use of the production infrastructure.
There are a lot of people that have been turned off by Tesla (or Musk directly) that may never go back to that well, but there may well be people that frankly just want what they consider the best car for their money, this increases as the cost of entry reduces. I’m always wary of the echo chamber of an online forum where frankly likely half or more of the people proclaiming they will never buy something likely either never had any intention of doing so anyway or, just as possibly, perhaps couldn’t afford to in any case. There may be plenty more that for whatever reason aren’t as bothered by what’s going on and don’t feel the need to proclaim their view far and wide. Plenty of people were completely turned off by VW after Dieselgate and many other automotive “scandals” as well, but there still seem to be plenty of newly registered VWs running around my neck of the woods…
Using percentages to denote shifts in sales/production is useful sometimes but for whatever reason LOTS of outlets (including this one on occasion) are bad at not realizing that a percentage is not necessarily a good indicator of anything when the numbers are small in relation to the greater story. For example Germany’s Tesla sales may have dropped 76 or something percent last month (huge headlines), but if you look at the numbers that 76% seems huge but actually means sales dropped from 6000 to about 1500. NOT GOOD, HOWEVER, that drop comprises 4500 units – Compared to the 1.8 MILLION sold all of last year worldwide or 150,000 units per month. Compared to that it’s a 3% drop. I know, other countries saw drops as well and of course it’s not a good thing for Tesla, but surely misleading. Now, if sales worldwide dropped 76% (or even 26 or 16%) that would be a FAR larger story – and I realize is of course possible, but just wanted to put the perhaps “misleading percentage” view out there…. I do not know if Tesla increased sales in ANY market last month but do have my doubts that much of the press would make a headline or story about that if it were to happen as it doesn’t fit the overall narrative.
Is that even possible? I mean, they’ve cut so much out of their cars already that they even removed part of the steering wheel. They’ve cut so much even DOGE couldn’t find more to cut. They’ve cut so much…okay, I’ll stop. 😛
It’s been several years since I was in a Tesla, but I had the same thought. It was so “Scandinavian” inside, there didn’t didn’t seem to be that much content to de-pop.
That said, maybe (hopefully?) they mean to rip out all of the hardware that will (eventually, maybe) used for the self driving system and give us a regular old “mechanical” version that eschews all the Software Defined Vehicle crap that really isn’t needed to get someone from point a to point b. It will never be upgradable to Level 5 self driving, but let’s be honest, the current vehicles with their existing computers and sensors aren’t going to be upgradable to that anyway.
Imagine a Tesla with traditional door handles, and things like that. More mechanical and less wizardry. That might actually be a Tesla I’d buy.
The one silver lining to Musk imploding Tesla is that maybe we’ll get away from the idea that all EVs have to have stupid interiors to be “modern”. So many other companies copied them and ruined their EVs for me.
I drove an EV
Or should I say, it once drove me
Ah, it's not fantastic
Norwegian plastic
I won’t call it “Scandinavian” until it can be fixed with an Allen key and there are a couple of leftover screws.
“Is that even possible?”
Yes… they could cut out the self-driving computer and related equipment. That alone would be a big cost saving.
Also all new Teslas have powered trunks/liftgates, heated seats, heated steering wheels and dash cams. Those are all features that can be axed.
And they can also ditch the glass roofs and/or sunroofs for a regular metal roofs which will likely reduce cost and weight
And they can ditch the leather or faux-leather for a regular cloth interior.
That’s off the top of my head
When Ford released the Maverick pick up, the planned build ratio must have been developed by the people whose comments I just read. The deconted version was what everyone wanted but could not get.
Which made them discontented.
Apparently, the wise move was to wait for a ’24 from a dealer that sold at MSRP. Said dealer then applied all available discounts that negated the new $1500 charge for the hybrid and got me a bed liner. And so far, no issues and no recalls.
All that and it’s a blast to throw around in the curves, the off ramps and on roundabouts, particularly if there’s a BroDozer trying to catch to tell you “It’s Not A Real Truck”.
The lower price Teslas might just be the ones that didn’t pass QA and will be sold with shortened warranties.
Telsa has QC inspections?
Here we go with “decontenting” cars again. The thing is, you could get away with it 40 or 50 years ago when we didn’t necessarily take things like AC and power windows for granted. If you wanted a stripped down Cavalier or Corolla it was right there on the lot.
Things are different now. Asking people to give up things they’ve come to expect in their cars is different from asking them to pony up extra for things they look at as luxuries. If you put a new Corolla with, say, no AC and crank windows on a lot in 2025 for $20k 99.9% of buyers will walk right past it to pay more for one with those features. Then they’ll bitch about an automaker DARING to offer a car without AC in 2025.
This. But what if ‘decontenting’ was just a radio with bluetooth instead of navigation, car play, etc. etc. etc., and then a plan cloth interior instead of heated/cooled/massaging leather seats. I would be open to that if the savings was real.
Better yet a big hole in the dash for whatever aftermarket solution you want to shove in there.
Where are you going to put the screen for the mandatory by law backup camera?
Once screens became mandatory the cheapest way to do radio and HVAC controls was to incorporate them into the touchscreen. Taking away the touchscreen and going back to physical switches and buttons adds cost it doesn’t reduce it. .
Where are you going to put the screen for the mandatory by law backup camera? In the rear view mirror.
“Taking away the touchscreen and going back to physical switches and buttons adds cost it doesn’t reduce it.”
Which makes it so strange how even the cheapest cars like the Nissan Versa come with a set of physical controls. Even the Tata Nano had them:
https://imgd.aeplcdn.com/1056×594/cw/ec/21398/Tata-Nano-GenX-Interior-63564.jpg?v=201711021421&wm=1&q=80
Certainly agree, we have come accustomed to a certain lifestyle. And I think we cannot forget the level of safety, including structural safety that is now built into cars which increases the price.
But there are a lot of things that can still be deconted or be offered without being tied to some rediculous trim package. I don’t need a power rear hatch, gravity has been helping with that for a long time now. I never use radar cruise. Make a nicer looking smaller wheel that has better efficiency and lower cost.
Powered Door Handles…..that need mechanical back ups anyway!
It depends on how it’s done. The stuff people really care about is the heat, A/C, decent stereo, having enough space, power windows and the heated seats.
So what can we ditch that would cut the cost but not affect the appeal too much?
Well we can cut those self-driving computers and related equipment, the glass roofs/sunroofs, relace the leather/leatherette with cloth, ditch the powered trunk lids and the dash cams. Oh and they can also ditch the oversized wheel/tires and put on something more sensibly sized that will also be cheaper to replace when they wear out and also be less susceptible to damage when hitting a pothole.
I would even say that the sat-nav-stereo systems can be ditched for a cheaper bluetooth speaker system with the assumption you’ll just use your phone for music, radio and navigation.
Not sure a decontented vehicle would save any money unless it was built specifically for that purpose on a separate line and then you might as well just optimize the design. They need to build econoboxes again. Make them BEV you don’t need the range just a two door thing like the Chinese do. They sell theirs for $5k. I bet if they scaled up and did the work they could sell it for around $10k. Will do better in crash tests because you don’t have to worry about the engine crashing into the cabin. Make a little truck version too basically American kei cars.
You can build it on the same line and save plenty of money, especially if it increases the line’s utilization rate since the line costs the same to have/build whether it runs one, two, or three shifts, but increased usage amortizes the cost over more units. Then remove standard heated seats (which in the new Y went from 5 positions to 4 already, if nothing else just get rid of the heated rear seats), Tesla builds their own seats so removing those components saves money. Remove the standard cargo cover that the original Y didn’t have anyway but the 2024 and newer did/does. Remove the wood trim part that goes on the doors. Remove the lighting strip. Make the three mirrors not auto-dimming again like it was on the 2020. Remove the new light bar thing on the back. And the front. Reduce the wheel and tire size by an inch. Figure out of a painted metal roof panel plus headliner is in fact cheaper than the glass one. Cloth interior may be less expensive than the pleather. Remove navigation as standard. That’s just off the top of my head. Plenty of ways to save IF the price can also be reduced commensurately. A $50k Tesla Y Dual Motor isn’t cheap currently, but currently in my state most buyers get $7500 off and an additional $5000 from the state, so that’s $37500, plenty competitive with lots of normal cars. Figure out how to reduce the $50k to $40k and still take $12500 off and now you’re at $27500 net. You can’t find much of a regular CUV for that.
A standard-range, RWD Mach-E Select is $38,490 before incentives and has a 260-mile EPA range, although it’s ineligible for the federal credit on purchases. Another three grand bumps the trim up to Premium, which is quite well equipped.
And Ford manages to lose money on every one from what I understand. They are buying volume with their pricing. Take 15-20% of the range out of the Tesla (i.e. reduce battery size and cost) to get it down to 260 miles, then remove the front motor and associated paraphernalia (drive shafts, wiring etc) and you’d probably be well under that $38490 figure once you remove all the other stuff too, no?
It’s also built in Mexico so next month the price might magically go up by 25%. Or at least the landed cost will.
A $38490 car as currently offered is still more than a lot of people can or want to afford.
All those divinations cost money in complexity plus the systems are already in the car. If the car has screen nav basically costs nothing the hardware are already there. That’s what alot of manufactures found and that thinking seems to be increasing all the features are there just the button isn’t hooked up. Toyota became very famous for that. You just buy the button and put it in and have that feature. They launched the scion brand with that in mind the only factory option was paint color and transmission. They can use cheaper materialsand for BEV smaller packs maybe smaller motors. The new cheaper y is targeted at 20% reduction. Apparently they will have a smaller pack not have ventilated seats no rear heated. No rear screen. Probably no adas.
Developing a new cheap model would cost a ton and take years. Decontenting an existing line can save billions and get to market quickly.
It really depends on the design and the suppliers now. If you have to design and build parts to reduce costs then probably not as much savings as you think. Using parts bins sure. Ram keeping the classic around made alot of sense as all the design and tooling was more then paid for. Alot of the features in a modern car don’t actually cost that much as they are scaled but adding complexity to the lines does cost time and money. There is a reason you can’t get a car without power windows or locks anymore. It was actually coating the OEMs money. Cycle time and logistics is a huge cost in the production of cars. Most lines now are 92 % to 99% automated so divinations would have to be programmed to the robots adding complexity too. It’s not the same as a 1980s factory where guy makes parts sends to factory and then guy bolts part on.
Lower price models are scheduled for completion in the next 12-18 months, right alongside the level 5 driving update, the taxis, robots, and all other claims meant to string along the investors propping up a comically silly P/E ratio.
It’s not like you can just make up some claims, and then make up news ones in 18 months because everyone has moved on. That would never work, right?
It’s almost certainly not that the CEO only cares about making money and only promises lower price models, but never actually intends to build any because they’re not as profitable as higher trims and profit is the game, not the environment.
Sometimes I feel like look out my window every day and all I can see are an endless stream of people lining up to voluntarily jump off a high cliff.
I’m going to go drive the car Thomas told me to buy.
Toyota Sienna cargo van. I know why they don’t make one – they’re not exactly in need of the extra volume with the high-margin people movers selling to a waiting list.
Back in the 90s-00s I thought they should’ve made the 2wd 4Runner the same low ride height as the base 2wd pickups and offered the same ultra Spartan base trim level.
Come to think of it Toyota hasn’t offered a cargo van since the…Van? I think? Sienna never has. The Tacoma has always had good fleet business, so I would think they would have a case for it unless they don’t specifically so they can preserve the Tacoma biz.
And now that I think of it Chrysler hasn’t really had anything with the Grand Caravan-turned-Ram C/V and the Promaster City gone. A standard Promaster is close in size to work but still $4-5k more than most base minivans which already aren’t cheap.
I remember when the prior gen Tacoma came out and they all went to the higher suspension. I knew a fleet manager at a dealer group that was worried that was going to hurt his Tacoma biz and if he needed to look at offering Frontiers. Exterminators in particular seemed to get a lot of those low ride Tacos, maybe a holdover from when some of them put a bug on the roof. I don’t think it mattered in the end.
Thanks to a lot of regulations is very hard to have basic vehicles from a safety perspective. Having power windows does not add a lot of cost at this point, and some cars I was thinking they already have “decontented” versions like the Toyota Camry Hybrid, Corolla, some KIAs, Chrysler released the Voyager. Basically all rental specs are the decontented versions.
You need to go back to the 90s if you want to see truly basic vehicles. I would love to see premium brands offering more basic versions how they do in Europe.
What car needs a super decontented version?
Every Single F***g Vehicle that abandoned knobs for an all-touch screen control system.
Found a Mennonite!
To be fair, I’m not a Mennonite, but I 100% agree with you. My needs for a car. Reliable, good seat, driver’s side window that rolls down, HVAC, a sound system that syncs up with my phone so I can listen to books or spotify or whatever. And that’s it. Vinyl flooring? Sure. Manual mirrors? Sure, I adjust them once and leave them. Manual seat, again, I adjust it once and leave it. Fixed windows outside of the driver’s side? Sure, why would I roll them down if the AC works?
I’ll just draw a line about painting the emblems black to hide the chrome.
Luddite? Mennonites hate vaccines, not screens.
Doesn’t your phone have a screen?
Nah, I’m an engineer. I see more features and figure its more things to break. My wife sees more things I can break trying to fix them.
“ Mennonites hate vaccines, not screens.”
That’s not really true of all Mennonites:
https://www.mennonitechurch.ca/article/12323-a-message-from-mennonite-church-canadas-executive-ministers-on-religious-exemptions-from-covid-19-vaccines
In reality, it’s more like there are idiot anti-vaxxers who happen to be Mennonites (or specific groups of them).
Mennonites are not anti-vaxxers by default.
It was purely a tasteless joke based upon the recent Measles news. One of my oldest friends is a Mennonite and very much modern in all things sciencey, but glad you made the point, as I didn’t want to step on my own lame joke by doing same.
Not sure if this hasn’t been figured out by most people yet but the screens are obviously cheaper than multiple knobs/switches and surrounds/trim pieces along with connectors and wiring for them, never mind the increase in installation cost. The screen IS the decontenting. Adding a feature to an existing screen is basically free beyond the coding, for which in reality its equivalent task would still be created for a separate switch or knob but now with an increase in production and installation cost.
I believe the screens cut costs by not having to wire up a bunch of knobs and buttons. I hate screens for everything too though.
That and they also save money when selling the vehicle in different markets with different languages and standards.
In the past, it would require changing physical parts… which is expensive. With the screen, it’s a quick language/location setting change done in software.
Jeep Wrangler.
2 door only, lose the A/C, no hard top option, no back seat, no touchscreen, no radio (just an empty single din slot), 4 cylinder only, vinyl seats, no carpet… doors optional.
And yet, Jeep would find a way to make that unreliable with electrical gremlins.
When, exactly did Lucas Electronics start getting contracts with Jeep? Seems to have happened, but honestly I don’t know when.
TJ owner here. Agree with your message IF the 4-banger offers enough torque to allow the vehicle to get out of its own way. Perhaps a NA Hurricane tuned for low-RPM torque.
Agreed (former TJ owner and I kinda miss it). It was merely a cost saving method that may end up being a turbo 4 because that’s world we live in. A TJ with a 4 banger is an unbelieveable turd.
How do you decontent a Tesla? Give it like a led screen or something? No back seats? There’s not much left to remove.
Cut a hole in the bottom of the driver’s seat and go full Fred Flintstone. New Energy Vehicle my ass. We’re going Old Energy.
Remove the self driving computer and related hardware, replace the faux-leather with cloth, get rid of the power trunk function, replace the glass roofs with regular metal ones, install a smaller wheel/tire package, lose the dashcam, ditch the heated seats and ditch the heated steering wheel.
I think the self driving computer is like the only computer they make, they all get the same computer/tablet hardware, similar with the seats maybe? So to create a cheaper option may not save much.
But leaving out some of the cameras, and then the glass roofs/frunk/wheels probably good, maybe basic paint options.
“I think the self driving computer is like the only computer they make”
Given they are involved with their own computer/hardware design, they absolutely can save a lot simply by discontenting what is on the board such as less ram, less storage, cheaper cpu, etc.
It would be their same computer, but with stuff left off.
An analogy I can give you is like having a home computer… but instead of having a more powerful discreet NVidia graphics card, you remove that and just rely on the on-board graphics… which can be perfectly adequate if you don’t need to do anything that is graphically demanding.
No paint. Cyber look.
“replace the faux-leather with cloth”
I dunno if there are actually any cost savings in that.
You might be right about that. I did a cursory search on he cost of automotive vinyl against the cost of automotive cloth… and I found this:
https://midwestfabrics.com/en-ca/collections/automotive-upholstery-vinyl
https://midwestfabrics.com/en-ca/collections/original-oem-detroit-number-fabrics
And yeah… the vinyl is 1/3 of the cost.
And that suggests to me that the odd time I’ve seen car companies up-charge for the ‘leatherette’ interior, it’s one of the bigger pricing scams going on in the auto industry.
Wool is what you want anyway.
The problem with decontenting is it usually doesn’t reduce cost for the manufacturer in the way that people think that it does. Most of the cost associated is baked into the platform design of a vehicle and the materials it is constructed out of. I constantly see this idea that cars would cost so much less if we just got rid of fancy infotainment and used crank windows but that’s just not really how it works. Tesla is going to decontent the admittedly already spartan Model 3 and Model Y but if the cost is much lower it is almost assured that the difference is coming more from the margin on the vehicle than the difference in cost to produce. Content and features in vehicles exist to justify the high prices of different trim levels, not the other way around with the content driving the high prices of higher trim levels.
It was pointed out in the article but I am not sure that a lower priced Tesla will solve Tesla’s demand problem. Resale values are stupid low for people trying to dump thier cars. Out of curiosity I browsed Model 3 Performance for sale and could easily find them for low 20s which would be a stupid good deal if it weren’t for all the, umm, baggage attached to the brand.
This is just a layman’s idle wondering, but what if the “decontented” model was designed (across any options or trims for it) to be one motor only, and not have “FSD” available?
By removing all cameras except basic parking aids (reverse, maybe front, maybe right blind spot), I imagine it could have a significantly lower-grade ECU or equivalent.
The cost of developing new computers that did less than the regular ones would probably be prohibitively expensive. I think people keep forgetting that we’re already at the point where, due to economies of scale and engineering complexity, auto manufacturers will sometimes include all the hardware for high-trim features in low-trim models and just turn them off in software.
I’m aware of that to some degree, and I’ve even witnessed it myself in retrofitting fog lights and a driver footwell light in my 2012 Prius v.
But in this case, I thought I’d read that some fairly graphically intensive games can be played in a Tesla while it’s charging. If they have the equivalent of a GeForce 4080 or something, perhaps (again, the whole line, not just lower-cost choice for buyers) a really low-grade GPU would still be adequate?
But, as I said, I’m speculating.
The current ethos in car manufacturing world would suggest almost the opposite is the probable reality. Meaning the car still ships with basically the same hardware but is software locked for capability unless you purchase or subscribe to have it unlocked. So the car is capable of FSD but only for a monthly fee. It can accelerate to 60 in 5s but you’re stuck doing it in 10s unless you subscribe. So on and so on. This is what manufacturers mean when they talk about the “software defined vehicle” which will, in my best marketing execuspeak “unlock recurring streams of revenue” they just won’t make any money on the sale of the car but assume that a non insignificant number of people will pay for these things at a later date or on an ongoing basis.
In which case wait till the warranty expires (or buy it used) and jailbreak it.
As we’ve been discussing lately “decontenting” a car really doesn’t save a manufacturer much money anymore.
Almost every vehicle sold in the US comes with power windows. In order to satisfy the pikers, manufacturers would have to spend money designing a crank window system and possibly a new door card (or at least a blanking plate for where the window switches go). All so they could offer a very slightly cheaper base price? The math just doesn’t math.
People don’t believe me when I tell them that a manual transmission costs the automaker more than an auto today. It simply comes down to economy of scale.
What car needs a super decontented version?
Rolls Royce and Mabach. That would be fun.
I’d say a Porsche but they already de-content it and charge you more.
A stripped out Prius or Civic Hybrid would be interesting. Maximum fuel economy and lowest maintenance possible
The Prius LE is fairly basic for 2025, plus it is rated 5 mpg higher than the more loaded trims….probably has something to do with 17″ vs. 19″ wheels. My Prius has 15s, so I think the 17s are excessive.
The real message I’m getting from Jimmy at Ford –
“Howdy Team! I couldn’t successfully achive the absolute minimal goals I self imposed on my position and this organization so I will have to take a hit to my salary, only taking home this year about 10x what most of you will make in a lifetime of wage slavery. In an unrelated note, multiply toilet paper will no longer be provided”
That’s such a perfect example of short-sighted corporate cost cutting. I bet in the long run cheaper toilet paper doesn’t save you anything because it takes so much more of it to do the job. What you “saved” in reduced quality is made up for by increased quantity.
In Ford’s case it’s probably more like “Hey, we had this part that used to be metal and changed it to plastic to save 32 cents per car. Oh, and when that plastic part fails prematurely it grenades the engine and costs us a million dollars in warranty repairs.”
I can’t even fucking fathom an income like that.
In most cases it’s almost all stock/options, but it’s not like that’s a bad thing. Ford is rare in paying a 5%+ dividend so even if the stock is flat, it’s like getting an awesome savings account (even if you can’t easily cash in the millions below it, that’s a pretty nice living at 5% on top of the cash salary)
I despise it, and I despise pro sports salaries. Unfortunately, I can only boycott one of them.
I’d retire after one year and the world would never hear from me again. I loathe my job and can’t imagine ANY job I would love doing regardless of how much it pays. Once I have enough money to live a comfortable upper middle class life, I’m out. I don’t need 10 houses, a mansion, or to get into a mega-yacht dick measuring contest.
According to my tax bill, I had a very good last year income-wise, and I’m still multiple orders of magnitude below that. I assume at some point it becomes less about having money to spend and more like a video game where you just want the numbers to go up?
Good analogy — even in my own life, I have a sharp differntiator in what I consider to be a “reasonable amount” just when considering retirement investments vs daily expenses. I’ll watch retirement accounts go up (or more likely, down) more in a single day than I earned in my first year in the workforce.
But I’ll also bring stuff back to the grocery store if it rang up $2 too high. There’s a stark contrast between running an investment portfolio and a daily budget. If I fully conceptualized investments like day-to-day spending, I’d be too frozen with fear to take the necessary risks. It’s a very difficult mental hurdle.
I think people making this kind of money are living their whole lives in the first bucket. “Money can solve every problem” (and they’ll pay you enough that 100% of your focus is work.)
It’s funny because I’m almost the opposite. I find I have to be careful with investment money because the numbers are so much bigger than what I deal with on a daily basis that it becomes easy to say “Oh, I’ll just throw $500 over here at this risky thing.” I have to take a step back and ask myself how much $500 is in real world terms and that tends to discourage some of those bad decisions.
I’m pretty good about not stressing the little stuff day-to-day. For example, I bought a box of light bulbs recently and one of them died about 5 minutes after I installed it. I could have taken the whole thing back and gotten it replaced, but that bulb was probably only worth about $3, and with the time, fuel, and wear-and-tear on my car that it would cost to do the return it just wasn’t worth it.
All good considerations. I would never go out of my way to return anything, but any time I’m near Kohls I try to remember my Amazon returns (etc).
I think the part about investing is that once I hit a certain point, I had to build a mental barrier to prevent panic because something going down 10% is a much bigger hit as the years go by — in pure dollars. I try to think in percentages instead, otherwise I’d probably be selling daily. It’s terrifying 🙂
Yeah, especially the last couple of weeks. I’ve been carefully not looking at my 401k lately. 😉
Maybe this exists…. Are there monster brodozers that exist for just doing work and are de-contented , AND are priced like they are de-contented? I don’t feel like I ever see them; I only see F-X50s with 12 lug nuts/wheel, more chrome than a boomer car meet, and a 6 foot tall hood.
I feel like they must exist. If they don’t, then that is my answer.
They exist and always have.
The majority of trucks on the road are low trim, cloth or vinyl seat work trim.
Lift kits are not equipped at the factory so that’s like complaining about fart can exhausts on compact cars or stanced suspension.
First, I wasn’t complaining.
Second, are you doing okay today?
Doing great, thanks for asking.
Most people who use the term “brodozer” do so to be pejorative, and your post certainly doesn’t seem *complimentary*, so I assume you can understand my confusion when you claim not to be complaining?
I don’t think it’s wrong to use it as a pejorative, when most of the time these modifications make them less environmentally friendly, and more dangerous to other people (drivers, pedestrians, cyclists…) for not reason other than they think it is cool.
Much like the people that scream “Heritage, not hate!” when the display the Battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, but are from Oregon, or some such nonsense, I get it; I could have been clearer.
That said, ‘brodozer’ to me is more about a truck that is overly large and/or heavy duty, but not used for its intended purpose, lifted or not. I kid you not; I have seen an F-650 used as personal transport. If the same vehicle were hauling cattle 50% of the time, in my head, it would cease to be a brodozer.
So, they exist. They must not catch my eye, I guess.
Also, your reply had a little more ‘venom’ (couldn’t help myself) than I normally see from you, so, since I don’t walk in your shoes, I wanted to make sure all was good and not to escalate.
Hugs.
All good.
If any topic has a chance to get me heated it’s people complaining about the big trucks that I love, so it’s very possible I came across harsher than needed.
It’s Friday, it’s 75 degrees outside, and work is done. There’s nothing I can be mad about at the moment. Cheers.
The vast majority of the F-650s on the roads are things like box trucks, flat beds, and wreckers. It is the F-250 and F-350s that get used as personal daily drivers.
EDIT: And yes, basic decontented work trucks exist. My neighbor has a basic white, regular cab, long bed Chevy Silverado 1500 WT package that he uses as a contractor. The only added accessory is a ladder rack.
There are de-contented trucks, but people don’t buy them as long as they can get a nearly decade long loan to buy higher trim levels. Even the work truck trims have a nice profit margin built in, at least for the manufacturers.
There are a couple car lots around where I live that deal mostly in used ‘white’ trucks. Not sure how successful they are, but they’ve managed to stay open for years now.
New, they tend to be bought by corporate entities that buy a hundred trucks at a time.
I don’t know if I can call it quite “super decontented” but I think a Panel Van Leaf would be cool. Pull all the seats but the driver’s seat and possibly the front passenger seat, bed-coat the floors, optional steel panels instead of windows for the rear doors and the rear hatch.
I bet you could do that and charge standard Leaf prices or less for them. Sure as hell beats a proper electric van that you can’t get because demand is through the roof for them.
You just built a modern Grumman LLV.
I test-drove an E-Transit two weeks ago. Wasn’t any problem and I told them up front I wasn’t looking to buy.
From what I’ve seen there are pretty long wait times. Also the Leaf panel Van in its most expensive variant (62kWh battery) without discounts or incentives would be like $10K cheaper than the cheapest e-Transit Van, $20K Cheaper than the cheapest e-Sprinter Van, and $35K cheaper than the cheapest Promaster EV van.
That’s fair. I suppose my assumption was “one available for test drives = demand not high enough to keep them off the lot altogether”. On the other hand, if it’s there to encourage fleet sales, I guess that’s a different beast altogether.
Oh I understand, at the same time during the first production years of the Maverick people could test drive them but there were massive amount being sold to fleets (the 2.0T sadly) leading to orderers waiting over a year to get their Mavericks.
I think since Nissan is already producing the Leaf in the US a panel van variant or a panel van dealer installed kit would be a good way to help sales.
Honestly I think Nissan should convert their CHAdeMO Port to NACS along with the necessary software update, and just keep selling the regular Leaf but at a lower price point. Their new “Leaf” looks to be another Temu Model Y, which in this case is using the Ariya’s drivetrain and battery pack.
Honestly I think Nissan could have done a lot more with the Leaf due to the battery being passively cooled. For example they could have made a SWB 2 door, which I would have bought over my 4 door Leaf. The Panel van is a half assed version of what we really wanted which was the eNV200, but it’s too late to Americanize it now. A 2 Door Leaf Pickup wouldn’t be hard to make either.
I think the Leaf is a much better car than most think, it rides very nice.
I’m not sure what vehicles I’m thinking of specifically–maybe they were sporty vehicles or plug-in hybrids or something–but I seem to recall people basically had to choose between purchasing new sight unseen or not getting them at all, because there were none on the lots for test-driving. Maybe that was just a low point of supply chains earlier in COVID, though.
Sounds like something people who wanted Rav4 PHEVs would have had to deal with.
Make the glass roof out of metal. Ditch the pleather for cloth. Nerf some of the software niceties like the arcade and streaming. Blank off the frunk. Do the same to the rear cargo well unless it’s part of the rear casting. 18″ wheels. Don’t even think of offering a trailer hitch or a third row of seats.
Oh, and ditch Musk with his ridiculous compensation package for doing exactly nothing.
Don’t forget to build it in China and have best bud Donny exempt it from all tariffs and import duties.
What physical content can they actually strip out of a 3 or a Y?
I think the “cheap” Teslas will just be paywalled software versions that they’ll offer online for with the bullshit “energy savings” price built in and via their bullshit math will be $27k and then they’ll quickly remove it overnight.
That’s what they did for the “Standard Range” Model 3.
It was supposed to have a manual interior and cloth seats. Instead they just software limited SR+ Model 3s to have less range and non-functional rear heated seats.
They did this without personally informing the reservation holders. The only reason I found out was because I follow electric car blogs and one of them mentioned the change. It took 1 call every day over 3 days to customer service before I got an answer, meanwhile Tesla was trying to dump this car on me that I didn’t want, I ordered the SR M3 not because it was the cheapest, but because of the manual interior. I would have happily ordered a long range RWD M3 at the time if I could have gotten the manual interior in it, but that wasn’t an “option” at the time.
When I found out it was in fact a software limited SR+ M3 and not the SR M3 I ordered I canceled my order. I lost a decent chunk of change on “restocking fees” on aftermarket accessories even after explaining what happened. At least Tesla refunded me in full and paid for the shipping for the Tesla made Tesla accessories I had to return.
They can strip out as much FSD hardware as possible but the results may be too popular for the good of the rest of the lineup.
Clips off turn signal stalk
“That’ll be $8 cheaper.”
(Remember that one movie about the guy who came here from Africa and acted really awkward and never really fit in, even though he was super rich? I don’t mean Elon.)
Coming to America with Eddie Murphy and Arsenio Hall?
Almost. Turns out it WAS the Elon movie I was thinking of. He stole the whole plot from Eddie and rebranded it as his own. /s
Every time I start talking about boxing, the white guy has to bring up Rocky Marciano.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx_cXd_FFL4
$8 times 1.8 million Teslas sold last year is $14,400,000 and then multiply by how many years you make the car that way. That’s why someone somewhere thinks it’s a good idea. Same reason why the Chevy Colorado no longer has a headlight switch. Etc.
Or do it to 50 components and there’s $400 in savings. Often with the bonus of decreased weight and better mileage/range. Why do you think it’s hard to find a spare tire standard on a new car these days? Money AND weight savings AND increased MPG, AND more cargo space, 4x bonus points for someone!
There are people in virtually every larger company whose job is (and who often get bonuses as a percentage of the actual unit costs saved) based on figuring this kind of stuff out. Usually it’s less visible stuff, like who cares if a ’90s Camry’s ashtray is painted dashboard color or if they are all black, but it’s a real thing.
I used to purchase items for production runs at my old company. We’d order 40-50 different material items in quantities per day from 4 or 5 suppliers that had various items and get special pricing for particularly large special runs vs standardized “catalog” quantity pricing. One day I started requoting ALL the different daily purchases as single combination orders and saw SIGNIFICANT savings as the combinations always broke through multiple price break tiers. That was an exceptionally good bonus year me and the company got the exact same supplies at the exact same time. The vendor’s sales staffs were not quite as happy as they somehow were paid less but in reality they still sold the same volume of stuff…
The Lucid Air. Strip out anything you can, but keep the range, heated seats, and cruise control.
I agree in theory, but the range is probably 90% of the cost of the car.
It’s pack is smaller than a lot of long range EVs, in the 84-88kWh range. It could be doable.
Lucid is also bleeding money selling them where they are, I just don’t see anything major that could come out.
The minimalist designs of “luxury” EVs are basically to disguise the fact that you’re paying for a battery, motors, and not much else.
Which is exactly why I want EREV trucks. Stop cramming massive batteries in, give me one with 100-150 miles of range, and fill in the rest with a range extender.
You should really listen to the design ethos of Peter Rawlinson and how he has tried to position Lucid. It’s all about having less battery, which translates to less weight and less cost. That’s why he is crazy about packaging, efficiency and all of that way more most other EV companies.
SavageGeese had a great interview with him.
Yeah, I feel like a lot of the cost of a Lucid is the R&D to make everything as efficient as possible. There are a lot of bespoke components in one of those, and that’s how you end up selling a sedan with segment-leading range for six figures and still lose money on them.
The heated seats can go as well. Heated seats are for the weak.
Heated seats in an EV can help contribute to overall warmth and comfort without having to rely on the HVAC system to generate as much heat, helping preserve some range.
Or you can save even more range by wearing a warm coat, boots, gloves and a hat!
On a more serious note, heated seats are not a substitute for actual heat. Personally I hate heated seats. I don’t have problems with my ass being cold. It’s my hands and face that get cold.
Also heated seats don’t help with defrosting the windows.
I know some people straight up don’t like the “did I pee my pants” feeling (their description, not mine) of heated seats either. Not a substitute, but still can reduce the load or offset the need for heat alone. Backwards and excessive as it sounds, Ford actually was studying the use of heated surfaces to maintain cabin warmth and found it could reduce the demand on the HVAC and maintain some range.
And yes, that’s true of defrosting, but defrosting isn’t 100% of the needs for heat either. Now that you mention though it I do wonder what the rate of heated windshields (more like Ford’s old InstaClear) in EVs are, because that seems like a good use for it. It’s been popping up in some vehicles but haven’t paid close attention on the EV side.
Then call me weak. I wanna be comfortable when I’ve trekked across the frozen tundra in -35 to reach my car after work. The closer I get to 40, the more I stop caring about my image and just wanna be comfortable.
My buddy’s dad, whom I bought my w126 from, proudly states that despite the 2 car garage attached to his house, he has done all his work over the last 40 years in the gravel driveway.
I told him, “you rock that world, I know I’ll avoid it if I’m not comfortable, so I use the concrete floor on my heated garage.”
I spent enough years working on stuff in driveways and apartment parking spaces, NO MORE! Weak mode activated.