Tesla 3 depreciation ...

OVERKILL said:
We had a similar dog and pony show here in Ontario with the GEA (Green Energy Act) which was supposed to "kick-start the economy" after the financial collapse in 2008 and create hundreds of thousands of "green" jobs and somehow do this with no impact on rates!

Of course that was a lie. Start-ups that appeared overnight to install, broker, and capitalize on FIT contracts folded or disappeared as soon as those contracts dried up. Policy that was supposed to ensure that wind turbines being installed in Ontario were made in Ontario vanished and the companies making the parts closed-shop and the parts imported. It was all a giant sham that burdened ratepayers with the cost of 10's of billions of dollars in insane iron-clad contracts for very low-value generation sources that paid them a premium for electricity produced out of phase with demand. This was then either exported at a massive loss, as all of this over-built capacity producing when it wasn't needed tanked the market value, or, we paid to curtail it because somehow paying these developers for "potential" energy produced by a non-fuelled source was baked into these contracts.

It was a total fleecing. A boondoggle of epic proportions and for which my kids will be paying as these contracts were predominantly on 20-year terms, roughly tied to the lifespan of the assets.

Amazingly, despite all this, the crushing defeat from the electorate in the last election and the total inability to align with the province's demand profile there are still a vocal group of people who get quite indignant when discussing the cancellation of this policy and actively advocate for doubling down on more of what has already proven not to work. It's like their adherence to ideology has completely blocked their ability to think rationally.
Click to expand...

"Fleecing" is exactly right.
 
wpod said:
I want a pick up , I want a $100,000.00 bass boat to save money on food. I want a Tesla . Justification enough.
Click to expand...

Hey, it's your money. Best 2 days of owning a boat are the day you buy it, and the day you unload that depreciated turd on the next guy.

Nash said:
Bush's Solyndra help was a great idea and they had superior technology. The Chinese solar panels even though inferior were much cheaper. Solyndra couldn't compete. People buy by price. That's what happened, and it's too bad it did.
Click to expand...

Much like the total boondoggle dishonesty of "climate change" and "eco-friendly" EVs, is the dishonesty of "eco-friendly" solar panels. They're produced using extremely toxic substances from raping the earth, and they destroy a lot of land and kill a lot of wildlife. So, yes it's true that they are quite possibly less eco-friendly than good old oil and gas. And the reason China can do it cheaper is because they don't follow EPA laws and rules and can strip mine, use, and dump toxins at will without any regard for the environment or wildlife.

So if you think driving a Tesla powered by solar panels is the miracle to save the world and climate, you've been so badly lied to and deceived on so many levels it's staggering... These all require strip mining for industrial use, produce massive amounts of extremely toxic chemical byproducts and actual products which end up in landfills prematurely, and also directly harm the environment and wildlife.

sciencing.com

Toxic Chemicals in Solar Panels

During manufacture and after the disposal of solar panels, they release hazardous chemicals including cadmium, silicon tetrachloride and lead.
sciencing.com sciencing.com

fee.org

Solar Panels Produce Tons of Toxic Waste—Literally

Beyond the clear misallocation of resources and energy market price distortions, there are numerous human health concerns directly related to the manufacture and disposal of solar panels.
fee.org fee.org
 
Nash said:
Bush's Solyndra help was a great idea and they had superior technology. The Chinese solar panels even though inferior were much cheaper. Solyndra couldn't compete. People buy by price. That's what happened, and it's too bad it did.
Click to expand...
 
Dave9 said:
... and if going by real data, that is incorrect, compared to say, major automotive brands, not Chinese scooters.

www.motorbiscuit.com

Tesla's Reliability Ratings Are Pretty Concerning But Does Anyone Actually Care?

Tesla is known for proving that electric vehicles can be popular. However, what Tesla isn’t known for is reliability. While its vehicles may be desirable,
www.motorbiscuit.com www.motorbiscuit.com
Click to expand...
You are talking about something different than what I said. I said electric motor is not a reliability concern. Prius shows that, Tesla's motor is fine, they have problem building the car not the motor.

EV's problem is the battery charging and cooling, Tesla's problem is the car reliability, not the electric motor. Toyota's electric motors are fine, like most other hybrids brands out there.
 
PandaBear said:
You are talking about something different than what I said. I said electric motor is not a reliability concern. Prius shows that, Tesla's motor is fine, they have problem building the car not the motor.
Click to expand...

No, some other make and model is no proof, just like any widget can have its own weak links that others don't.

Model 3 has been in production for less than 4 years, barely any hit the streets until 2018. That's not enough time to prove anything. Engines that die in 10-15 years with avg mileage are considered substandard today.

Realize that parameters like "reliability" have to be seen in context, not just does it suit you that they work when fairly new. The question is what happens when they aren't so new and the high repair cost causes them to be sent to scrap. Remember the topic was about depreciation.
 
Dave9 said:
No, some other make and model is no proof, just like any widget can have its own weak links that others don't.

Model 3 has been in production for less than 4 years, barely any hit the streets until 2018. That's not enough time to prove anything. Engines that die in 10-15 years with avg mileage are considered substandard today.

Realize that parameters like "reliability" have to be seen in context, not just does it suit you that they work when fairly new. The question is what happens when they aren't so new and the high repair cost causes them to be sent to scrap. Remember the topic was about depreciation.
Click to expand...
Electric motor is a very ancient technology, hybrid is just an EV with 2 motors and 1 gas engine. When is the last time you see an EV die because the electric motor overheat and shorted / or demagnetized?

The last time I've seen is around 150k in Prius gen 1, but since gen 2 this is no longer common (of course you will see some minor problem here and there just like transmission problem and engine problem in common ICE car).

Most of Tesla's problems are in the body repair, interior, touch screen, window, parts availability, electronics outside of powertrain, logging, etc etc. They are not reliable in that, their powertrain seems ok (say compare to a Nissan CVT or a Ford Taurus), their battery seems ok, the overall electric motor reliability department all over the world is well understood, they are old tech and have been used for more than 100 years.

If you are concerned with Tesla, wait and buy a Toyota EV when they show up, or buy a Honda EV, or Chevy Bolt. Those companies know how to build cars and have been for a few decades.
 
PandaBear said:
Electric motor is a very ancient technology, hybrid is just an EV with 2 motors and 1 gas engine. When is the last time you see an EV die because the electric motor overheat and shorted / or demagnetized?

The last time I've seen is around 150k in Prius gen 1, but since gen 2 this is no longer common (of course you will see some minor problem here and there just like transmission problem and engine problem in common ICE car).

Most of Tesla's problems are in the body repair, interior, touch screen, window, parts availability, electronics outside of powertrain, logging, etc etc. They are not reliable in that, their powertrain seems ok (say compare to a Nissan CVT or a Ford Taurus), their battery seems ok, the overall electric motor reliability department all over the world is well understood, they are old tech and have been used for more than 100 years.

If you are concerned with Tesla, wait and buy a Toyota EV when they show up, or buy a Honda EV, or Chevy Bolt. Those companies know how to build cars and have been for a few decades.
Click to expand...

Which, incidentally, causes depreciation! Cars are totaled out for body damage, interior damage, powertrains, etc. Add a electric motor of relatively young production and unknown long-term and you've got a car that, at best, may turn out to be a real surprising long-term gem. Odds are, these fill scrapyards in 15 years because key things break or fail and they are too expensive or otherwise not cost effective to maintain.

Contrast that with very very commonly found 100-200k mile cars from the late 1990s and early 2000s that are still driving almost like new on the roads today. An excellent reliable 15-20-30 year old ICE car is quite common, extremely affordable (in normal market times, not like today) and very easy to maintain. I have several of them, so I should know. I calculate that my 15-20+ year old vehicles have not even reached the 25% - 50% mark on their expected lifespan.

Literally this week I just watched a 1998 Honda Accord with 95k miles sell in hours for $3750, and a 1990 Toyota pickup with 150k miles sell for $15,000. I know, b/c I was keenly curious about these two. By my account, both sold in less than 5 days, and maybe as little as 1-2 days. These vehicles sold for a large % of their original costs, decades ago...
 
MrLemonade said:
These vehicles sold for a large % of their original costs, decades ago...
Click to expand...
Is that taking into account inflation?

IMO a 1990 Toyota pickup selling for $15k had to be highly modified... that's crazy money for a 30 year old truck. If that transaction did occur at $15k then it probably appreciated! but I'd think that is just due to a weird point in time at the moment.
 
MrLemonade said:
Which, incidentally, causes depreciation! Cars are totaled out for body damage, interior damage, powertrains, etc. Add a electric motor of relatively young production and unknown long-term and you've got a car that, at best, may turn out to be a real surprising long-term gem. Odds are, these fill scrapyards in 15 years because key things break or fail and they are too expensive or otherwise not cost effective to maintain.

Contrast that with very very commonly found 100-200k mile cars from the late 1990s and early 2000s that are still driving almost like new on the roads today. An excellent reliable 15-20-30 year old ICE car is quite common, extremely affordable (in normal market times, not like today) and very easy to maintain. I have several of them, so I should know. Literally this week I just watched a 1998 Honda Accord with 95k miles sell in hours for $3750, and a 1990 Toyota pickup with 150k miles sell for $15,000. I know, b/c I was keenly curious about these two. By my account, both sold in less than 5 days, and maybe as little as 1-2 days. These vehicles sold for a large % of their original costs, decades ago...
Click to expand...
You are still mixing things up to confuse people.

Nissan Juke is a piece of junk, despite being a common ICE design. You see them being junked at 70k because the CVT breaks. Corolla is fine going 30 years with no major problem. They are both ICE design and they are prove that specific car design matters. Same goes for a lot of junk ICE car out there.

Tesla, well I wouldn't call it junk yet but at least their problem is not the powertrain. Prius' electric department is fine, Chevy volt is fine. You see them going from 2006 till now for Prius doing fine other than a $4k worn out battery parts and install, and Chevy Volt from 2014 and up are reliable with all the early problem worked out.

So, fundamentally EV is fine in the motor, and people will junk their car because battery wear instead. Electric motor frequently run for 200-300k in hybrids and not breaking. Common 90s Ford / Chrysler / GM have reliability problems and are likely mostly gone by now. Nice that you cherry pick a Toyota and call ICE reliable when you ignore the common ICE too.

Now depreciation, has a lot to do with demand and supply. You won't see much depreciation when they are not yet oversupplied and everyone wants one. Then if one day they are flooding the market and rental car companies taking the dumping for cheap, you bet they will lose value like a rock even if they are reliable (i.e. Hyundai Elantra?).

Don't forget fashion too. Fashion sells and affects depreciation, but has nothing to do with reliability.
 
Last edited:
There is a difference between reliability and build quality.
By the way there are numerous accounts of 300K mile Tesla Model S out there.
Drivetrain maintenance is almost zero in comparison to ICE.
 
supton said:
Is that taking into account inflation?

IMO a 1990 Toyota pickup selling for $15k had to be highly modified... that's crazy money for a 30 year old truck. If that transaction did occur at $15k then it probably appreciated! but I'd think that is just due to a weird point in time at the moment.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% inflation is a factor. It's higher than advertised. I also think we're in crazy unusual times due to shortages. So your points are valid.

Yes, that pickup was cherry, a lifted 4x4 and I looked it over for 5 minutes. Interior looked great, exterior had minimal rust on body. Underside appeared rust free, which is the big thing for those. I'd have bought it for $5000. Maybe $7000. Nowhere near $15,000. Afterall, those are great reliable trucks but those 2.4L motors were anemic... Very very light duty truck, more for camping and hunting rigs, or light Home Depot runs than anything serious.
 
JeffKeryk said:
There is a difference between reliability and build quality.
By the way there are numerous accounts of 300K mile Tesla Model S out there.
Drivetrain maintenance is almost zero in comparison to ICE.
Click to expand...
Above I linked to a 4 year old Tesla with 400k miles. Very impressive on the surface.
Then, you see that it was basically fully rebuilt with a $29,000 maintenance pricetag in 4 years at 100k miles per year. So, sure, if you want to DOUBLE your car purchase price by basically replacing everything, they'll last literally forever! lol.

By contrast, I've got a 15 year old Ford Panther. I bought it last year, $2,600. Researching the records, which I had a good service history, with all maintenance, I'd have to estimate that including warranty work that car has way less than $2000 in all combined maintenance thus far, at 100k miles. And I'm putting a generously high $2000 estimate here. .... Nothing major has been done, and that car drives and purs like it rolled off the line yesterday. Extrapolate that out, and at 400k you're probably less than $8-10k in all combined maintenance. And that might include a major replacement or rebuilt of drive train and/or motor...
 
Last edited:
JeffKeryk said:
There is a difference between reliability and build quality.
By the way there are numerous accounts of 300K mile Tesla Model S out there.
Drivetrain maintenance is almost zero in comparison to ICE.
Click to expand...
A well designed battery system has a predictable depreciation of capacity / lifespan. EV cost are mostly battery cost, as is its cost of ownership. When the battery wears out the car wears out, it is pretty predictable. ICE car can be all over the place, but at least the fuel cost is predictable based on your usage. Both design can be reliable and unreliable, regardless of build quality (Mercedes? VW? Toyota?)

For EVs, the way to go is to know how much car you want to buy for how long of a usage time, and just use it. When things get into trouble with the battery just swap battery with junkyard pack or when the rest of the car (including powertrain) is worn out just swap it out with junked car because the battery is worn out, or part out / junk the car when the battery is worn out. You will likely be able to DIY a lot more because you don't need to deal with gasoline and engine / transmission and just nuts and bolt parts that are dry. The "car" part of EV is just the same as a gas car, any problem would be company and model specific. You will run into the same problem if you buy a custom Bugatti just like a Tesla, despite it being a gas car.
 
PandaBear said:
A well designed battery system has a predictable depreciation of capacity / lifespan. EV cost are mostly battery cost, as is its cost of ownership. When the battery wears out the car wears out, it is pretty predictable. ICE car can be all over the place, but at least the fuel cost is predictable based on your usage. Both design can be reliable and unreliable, regardless of build quality (Mercedes? VW? Toyota?)

For EVs, the way to go is to know how much car you want to buy for how long of a usage time, and just use it. When things get into trouble with the battery just swap battery with junkyard pack or when the rest of the car (including powertrain) is worn out just swap it out with junked car because the battery is worn out, or part out / junk the car when the battery is worn out. You will likely be able to DIY a lot more because you don't need to deal with gasoline and engine / transmission and just nuts and bolt parts that are dry. The "car" part of EV is just the same as a gas car, any problem would be company and model specific. You will run into the same problem if you buy a custom Bugatti just like a Tesla, despite it being a gas car.
Click to expand...

So, what you're saying, is that a $40,000 Tesla is "mostly" reflected in the battery cost. I haven't priced them so I don't know. But if true and if the battery wears out in ~10 years or less, outside warranty, leaving the consumer the option to buy a new extremely expensive battery, or throw out the car, basically?

As for the "at home" DIY on a Tesla, I highly doubt that is the reality. The consumer base is probably not the "DIY" type. They are the "write a check for a new one" type. So per what you're saying, when it becomes not cost effective to repair vs. replace, the scrap heap is where these end up in 10 years... maybe 15, which would reflect two battery lives. That's massive depreciation to almost $0 in a decade if true. What consumer is going to buy a battery for tens of thousands of dollars when it represents most of the cost of a new upgraded model?
 
MrLemonade said:
So, what you're saying, is that a $40,000 Tesla is "mostly" reflected in the battery cost. I haven't priced them so I don't know. But if true and if the battery wears out in ~10 years or less, outside warranty, leaving the consumer the option to buy a new extremely expensive battery, or throw out the car, basically?

As for the "at home" DIY on a Tesla, I highly doubt that is the reality. The consumer base is probably not the "DIY" type. They are the "write a check for a new one" type. So per what you're saying, when it becomes not cost effective to repair vs. replace, the scrap heap is where these end up in 10 years... maybe 15, which would reflect two battery lives. That's massive depreciation to almost $0 in a decade if true. What consumer is going to buy a battery for tens of thousands of dollars when it represents most of the cost of a new upgraded model?
Click to expand...

Yes, that 40k Tesla likely came with a 15k battery and you are depreciating it constantly. You "save" money by paying for electric instead of gas so hopefully you recoup some of that back. Is it a good deal? Compare to a 40k used Mercedes maybe it is a good deal. Compare to a 15k corolla probably not.

DIY is a relative term. How often do you replace a car because you cannot get parts that are expensive? How often do you hear people say "Panther last forever because those transmission are dime a dozen despite lasting only 70k"? Labor cost on those swap should be cheap, and my main point being, those parts are not what wears out a car and ship them to junkyard, it's usually the battery, and if you total a car with a good battery you can always find someone willing to buy it and swap into a car with a worn out battery.

Anyways, you should not mix up car company vs gasoline engine reputation. Toyota has reliable reputation regardless of hybrid (EV + gas) or gas car. Nissan has bad reputation in both (Leaf EV, Jatco CVT). It doesn't means EV is worse than gas in reliability (battery wear is predictable), it just means you need to buy from a reliable company.
 
Regarding to depreciation, let's use Leaf as an example: it is know to have battery problem, it depreciate to 4k and stop there, because you can replace the battery for 7k and make it worth 11k again.

Then we have Chevy Volt: it depreciate to 8k and sort of stop there, because people know it is still good as a hybrid mostly. It also has a good reputation of reliability and people see that its pack is over engineered (like Prius' powertrain).

Tesla so far seems to hold up well because the battery is reliable and they honor the battery warranty unlike Nissan, they will likely be worth a good amount if the body is not damaged in accident (parts and labor). It would likely depreciate somewhat between a Prius and a rare luxury car like some rare Land Rover with expensive hard to find body parts from junkyard.

So what's the lesson here? If you care about cost of ownership and reliability you should not buy something low volume, something exotic, and something complicated. This goes for EV or gasoline car.
 
In any case we are going to see the economics of the EV life cycle play out one way or the other, until a lower carbon transport solution is found. Recognising the cumulative external costs of using fossil fuels and pricing them appropriately will certainly have an influence and that price is certainly in the hundreds if not thousands of dollars per tonne of CO2. But that money belongs to the future generations whose lives all of us are affecting, it's not ours to spend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top