New ICE Vehicles Banned in California by 2035

[WildCard600]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

From the article:



Most likely it was a randomized survey. The Drive article says it was a survey of:



https://www.strategicvision.com/



These guys get paid to provide accurate information that they can sell to manufacturers, so manufacturers better know the minds of their buyers. This likely isn’t some social media survey from Facebook skewed towards metropolitan areas.

If the survey reveals that towing isn’t important, but size is important for looks or road presence then trucks could get bigger without gaining towing capacity, for example. Engines could be smaller and the bodies could stay lighter, being just bigger shells. This would be good to know.

"New vehicle owners survey" still doesn't tell us much. Where are these new vehicles being purchased ? If you took a random sampling of 10,000 people in my county where the median income is less than $40k I bet you would get a completely different set of data points vs driving a few counties over to the move affluent part of the state where median income is $80k+

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

You are saying most people who opted to pay more for the more powerful engine or for a sporty car that can often be less practical is doing so with no intention of using that power or taking a corner faster than your average vehicle, or enjoys the improvements to the steering or lack of body roll or stability?

Yes that is exactly what I am saying.

[Irace86.2.0]

[Atmo]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Nope.
"Most" drive their sporty cars as if they were a base sedan...

Describes my good friend and neighbor who trundles around in his Porsche Turbo Cab that he upgraded with engine and exhaust work because he likes the deafening sound it makes. I sometimes see his car parked outside one of my small town local pubs at happy hour. He got the car after the divorce, is a semi-retired surgeon and avid surfer who looks the part, and says it's part of enjoying life again.

The local truck owners seem to put diesels made to sound like Amtrak pulling out of the station at the top of their truck esteem ladder.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by WildCard600

"New vehicle owners survey" still doesn't tell us much. Where are these new vehicles being purchased ? If you took a random sampling of 10,000 people in my county where the median income is less than $40k I bet you would get a completely different set of data points vs driving a few counties over to the move affluent part of the state where median income is $80k+

It is just a randomized survey of owners who purchased new trucks from all over the county. Like it has been said, trucks make up the vast majority of vehicles sold in the US, but there appears to be a disconnect between buying a truck and using a truck for the utility they offer. People who buy new trucks are probably just buying a vehicle that happens to be a truck. This suggests EV truck sales should be strong despite EVs having less range and having significantly less range when towing. Why should they still be strong? Because truck owners overwhelming don't use their trucks for towing.

Just because people don't use the truck for towing or hauling, they could still purchase a truck for a feature they never use because they think they may use it one day or something. People don't need AWD, but it is often bought because people think it is necessary or it makes the vehicle safer. The survey quoted in the article only mentions what new owners do with their trucks, but not why they bought a truck.

None of the data considers what used truck buyers do with their trucks, so it is entirely possible that used truck owners are far more likely to tow or haul than new truck buyers, but we don't have data on that. Regardless of what used truck buyers want, it is what new truck buyers want that will influence the future of truck designs.

Trucks are mostly family haulers that have become luxury status symbols. EV trucks should fit right in.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...gain/95507684/

The latest evidence of the luxe-truck phenomenon comes from Ford, which says that 71% of buyers in November opted for the higher grades of its new Super Duty heavy-duty pickup. Those trucks range from the F-250 Lariat with a starting price of $45,105 up to the F-250 King Ranch at $54,260 – and prices can go a lot higher when options are added.

At GMC, about three-quarters of the light-duty crew-cab pickups are the upscale trim levels costing $40,000 or more.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/aut...trucks-n819741

According to industry data, at least half of all full-size pickups are now being sold as luxury-oriented models. That shouldn’t be a surprise, since more than half of all pickups are sold to those who don’t necessarily need the vehicles for work.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Yes that is exactly what I am saying.

I would say you are mistaken. It would be cheaper to buy a Mustang with an eco boost and just add a GT badge on the outside or an M badge on a 330i than buy the fast car if someone had zero intention of using the power. There isn't exactly much status in buying a Civic Si or CTR over a base Civic. In fact, the CTR is only available in the manual, so considering manuals make up less than 3% of the market then the CTR is a big inconvenience. Moreover, it seems like manual transmission sales in sports cars would mirror the low manual says in economy cars, but manual transmission sales are significantly higher in sporty cars. Why would this be the case if most owners of sporty cars are just using the car for commuting at average speeds?

Is this just your opinion, or is it backed up by any data?

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Is this just your opinion, or is it backed up by any data?

I would say it's backed up by the same data source you are using in this particular case.

I tend to agree with @Tcoat on this one though. As far as average drivers of ANY car, very few use them to their "potential" more than 5% of the time and some none at all. It's just reality outside the world of enthusiasts, or road ragers.

For every truck owner that owns a truck and uses it as a car, there's a sports car person that uses their sports car like a mini-van.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I would say you are mistaken. It would be cheaper to buy a Mustang with an eco boost and just add a GT badge on the outside or an M badge on a 330i than buy the fast car if someone had zero intention of using the power. There isn't exactly much status in buying a Civic Si or CTR over a base Civic. In fact, the CTR is only available in the manual, so considering manuals make up less than 3% of the market then the CTR is a big inconvenience. Moreover, it seems like manual transmission sales in sports cars would mirror the low manual says in economy cars, but manual transmission sales are significantly higher in sporty cars. Why would this be the case if most owners of sporty cars are just using the car for commuting at average speeds?

Is this just your opinion, or is it backed up by any data?

And if you buy a manual then you automatically must drive the car to the full potential? That is the most self supporting logic I have ever heard.
Hell your own number back up what I said The MTs, Hellcats, CTRs, top level mustangs, etc. etc make up well under 5% of the vehicles on the road. If even half of those people just use it to go get groceries they are still removed from the total.
You need to think outside your own personal little bubble and take a look around to know that few people use any vehicle to it's potential. Hell even on this forum I bet the majority are just daily drivers that rarely get pushed.
There is a real world out there that you seem to be very out of touch with.

[WildCard600]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

And if you buy a manual then you automatically must drive the car to the full potential? That is the most self supporting logic I have ever heard.
Hell your own number back up what I said The MTs, Hellcats, CTRs, top level mustangs, etc. etc make up well under 5% of the vehicles on the road. If even half of those people just use it to go get groceries they are still removed from the total.
You need to think outside your own personal little bubble and take a look around to know that few people use any vehicle to it's potential. Hell even on this forum I bet the majority are just daily drivers that rarely get pushed.
There is a real world out there that you seem to be very out of touch with.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I would say it's backed up by the same data source you are using in this particular case.

I tend to agree with @Tcoat on this one though. As far as average drivers of ANY car, very few use them to their "potential" more than 5% of the time and some none at all. It's just reality outside the world of enthusiasts, or road ragers.

For every truck owner that owns a truck and uses it as a car, there's a sports car person that uses their sports car like a mini-van.

Oh this makes me realize that I need to clarify a point that may be causing the confusion!
I am talking about people buying NEW vehicles that they do not use to the full potential. It doesn't matter who buys them used and what they do with them since the used market is a whole different ballgame. That 30 something buying a 10 year old Acura and flogging it around the track is not a good indicator of what the 70 year old school teacher does with it when it was brand new. The farmer that buys that 15 year old fully loaded F250 and hauls pig shit around is not who the manufacturers base their planning on. Once a used vehicle hits the second, 3rd, forth or tenth owner the use can be radically different.

[soundman98]

with everything going on in this thread, i feel i must add:

MY PENIS IS BIGGER THAN YOURS

thank you.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

And if you buy a manual then you automatically must drive the car to the full potential? That is the most self supporting logic I have ever heard.
Hell your own number back up what I said The MTs, Hellcats, CTRs, top level mustangs, etc. etc make up well under 5% of the vehicles on the road. If even half of those people just use it to go get groceries they are still removed from the total.
You need to think outside your own personal little bubble and take a look around to know that few people use any vehicle to it's potential. Hell even on this forum I bet the majority are just daily drivers that rarely get pushed.
There is a real world out there that you seem to be very out of touch with.

That isn't what I am saying; using the available power is not the same as driving the car to the full potential. I am saying that buying a manual might suggest someone is more inclined to drive the car for the sporty experience or pleasure of driving because the vast majority of people find the manual an inconvenience. This is also why manufactures tend to put DCTs and better feeling/shifting automatics in sporty cars too because often these cars are designed to perform or for the enjoyment of their performance.

There are sporty variants of basic cars, and there are GT cars that cater to those wanting something with better handling and power, and there are sports cars that often give up some luxury, comforts and weight in favor of maximizing performance. A car can be configured in a sporty shape like the Challenger, which is essentially a two door version of the Charger, which is virtually identical in relationship to a BMW 4 series and 3 series, respectively, yet a BMW is just a premium sedan like a Honda Civic is an economy sedan. The Si or CTR are variants designed for those wanting to spend more for features they typically use. The vast majority of people don't pay for things they don't intend to use, so whether that is buying a sporty version of a car, a bigger engine in a car, a GT car or a sports car, most of those people are spending money for something they plan to use. They don't need to use it at 8/10ths to 10/10ths to be using the extra features they paid a premium for.

Conversely, truck buyers are spending more money without necessarily using the premium features they are paying for when they could own an SUV, a smaller CUV or a sedan. They are buying four wheel drive, but not using it. They are buying a haul bed, but aren't hauling anything. They are buying something with an engine and frame designed for towing, but they aren't towing anything. 70%+ of the market is truck sales, and the vast majority aren't using the features of a truck. If this was the other way around, and 70% of people were buying BMW M cars and CTRs and Dodge Hellcats or even just Mustang GTs over the four bangers, yet these people drove them all like they do now, then we would say the world has lost their mind. Instead, only a small subset of the population pays a premium for sporty versions of vehicles or for GTs or for sports cars or chooses manuals because only a small subset use these features. Furthermore, even if they don't use these features during the vast majority of their driving because not everyone hoons around 24/7, these people do use these features that they paid a premium for more often than one a year, which is in stark contrast to the people paying a huge premium for a truck but that never tows or hauls.

The big point...truck EV sales will probably do well because the vast majority of truck buyers are buying a truck for reasons other than utility like perhaps size, safety, road presence, looks, luxury, status symbol, etc.

[soundman98]

in places that get snow, almost everyone that buys a truck/suv is getting it specifically for the 4wd.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I would say it's backed up by the same data source you are using in this particular case.

I tend to agree with @Tcoat on this one though. As far as average drivers of ANY car, very few use them to their "potential" more than 5% of the time and some none at all. It's just reality outside the world of enthusiasts, or road ragers.

For every truck owner that owns a truck and uses it as a car, there's a sports car person that uses their sports car like a mini-van.

Sports cars make up such a small percentage of the vehicle sales. Trucks make up the vast majority. The two aren't comparable. Moreover, people use their sports car for the extra power for passing, for accelerating on an on-ramp, for the extra handling when entering every turn, for the enjoyment of hitting the DCT paddles or shifting the manual, etc. It isn't even close or comparable to 70% of people paying the premium a truck comes with, but literally never using the features. We are talking a lot of money for four wheel drive, the giant turbo diesel engine, the large frame, the extra cost of gas, the tow capacity, etc, but then never towing or hauling anything. This is like a person spending an extra $20k on a GT350 instead of a Mustang Ecoboost, but never pushing the throttle past 50%. This doesn't happen.

Clearly, the vast majority of people buying trucks aren't needing trucks for truck features. The premium is tied up in other features. This suggests a premium EV truck would be a success. It also suggests the vast majority of people would probably be fine with an EV for their daily, and they could rent a truck when they need truck features like WolfpackS2K suggested.