Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Vehicle 318
cartechboy writes "When one thinks of Consumer Reports, refrigerator ratings and car seat reviews usually come to mind, but the organization actually reviews cars too. In fact, it just released a new round of top vehicle picks and it said the Tesla Model S is is the Best Overall Car you can buy. It's unusual, to say the least, for an outlet that typically names a Toyota or Lexus to choose an electric car that costs nearly $100,000 in most popular configurations from a Silicon Valley upstart. Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. Isn't the Model S green? But I digress. A company that many thought would be bankrupt and closed by now has produced a brand-new electric car from scratch that Consumer Reports feels is the best car it's actually tested since 2007."
Required South Park Reference (Score:3, Funny)
"f you wanna live, you'd better step on the gas! Oh wait, is this a Tesla? Shit! Well press on the prissy pedal!" - Cartman
Re:Required South Park Reference (Score:5, Informative)
That "prissy pedal" makes the Model S go from 0 to 60 in 4 seconds and do a quarter mile in 12.5s. That's faster than a Porsche 911.
Re:Required South Park Reference (Score:5, Informative)
Weight figures:
Porsche 911: ~1300kg
Tesla Model S: ~2000kg
M4 Sherman: ~30000kg
Re: (Score:3)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simile
Re: (Score:3)
"Green" (Score:5, Interesting)
Interestingly, the Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. Isn't the Model S green? But I digress
Because the Prius is completely ordinary (or even sub par) in every aspect EXCEPT for it's "green" profile.
The Tesla S is a genuinely great car. From power to handling to in vehicle infotainment systems, everything in the Model S is top notch.
That might be related to the price tag of a Model S being about triple that of the Prius, but hey, you get what you pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, just about every professional reviewer disagrees with you.
But hey, haters going to hate.
Re:"Green" (Score:4, Interesting)
A poster who's made almost no posts except anti-Tesla posts. Someone has an axe to grind. Probably an employee of another car company.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk about surreal feelings of insecurity. Does Tesla threaten your livelihood, or something? Do you own a dealership? Not a single negative thing you said about the car is objective. In other words, your criticism was slack, vague, inert, and deceptive.
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure which is worse, replying to a troll or replying to yourself... eh.
I highly recommend anyone take a test drive instead of just believing some yahoo on the Interwebs (myself included). See if there is a Tesla dealership in your area, and sign up for a test drive. [teslamotors.com]
I was lucky enough to take a test drive on a random whim. Passed the showroom, and decided to take a peek. It was a slow day so I chatted with a sales rep for a bit and next thing you know, we're on the road.
It was an absolute blast, a
Re:"Green" (Score:5, Interesting)
Other people have addressed several of your issues, so I'm just going to look at the claim that driving uphill empties those batteries in very little time.
As far as I can tell, the steepest drive in the United States (from the beach to the top of Mauna Kea, HI -- not entirely paved) is approximately 13800ft / 4200 m above sea level. Since the mass of a Tesla Model S is 2100 kg, this would consume 25 kWh of energy (30 kWh if you loaded it with 300 kg of people and stuff and factor in a 93% motor efficiency). The energy stored in a full Tesla battery is either 60 or 85 kWh, depending on the model. The drive from Hilo is 43 mi / 71 km (or Kona is 64 mi / 103 km), which over flat terrain would consume 15 (or 20) kWh, for a total of no more than 50 kWh. Thus, you could easily do the drive in a charged 60 kWh Model S. And, the drive back would be entirely free because you just brake all the way down -- just don't charge it at the top unless you want to burn out your brakes.
In theory, the potential energy of a Model S (+300 kg) on top of Mount Everest is 59 kWh, so I don't recommend that with the 60 kWh battery, but then I suspect you'd have issues trying to drive any car to the top of Mount Everest.
Re: (Score:2)
Best car overall?? (Score:2, Insightful)
So, the best car overall is a $100,000 luxury vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??? Obviously Consumer Reports has a different set of standards than 99% of people who live in North America. Most of us are lucky if we afford one car worth $30K, let alone two (Tesla for city driving and another one for long distance).
I thought that the Consumer Reports mission was to test and report on consumer items not luxury goods...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It only needs to recharge for 20 minutes. AND, in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car. Difference is the cost basis is loaded up front. Look at what your monthly overall bills are for the life of your vehicle, including fuel and repairs, and you'll see that a Tesla is cheaper in the long run.
Re: (Score:2)
So you don't pay for repairs to the Tesla or any battery replacements?
Re: (Score:2)
Prius batteries are still going 15 years later. Too early to get anything more than an estimate for Model S batteries, but don't assume they need replacing/reconditioning any more often than an ICE car needs it's engine replaced/reconditioned.
As to repairs, there's far less to go wrong on EVs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
$70k is going to buy a heck of lot of gas and routine service, especially if the comparison vehicle is a relatively efficient hybrid.
Figure $3.50 for gas.. that's 20k gallons. 40mpg, that's 800k miles. Subtract a bit for periodic 6mo maintenance, I bet a lot of us would be trading in for something newer before we ever hit the point where the Tesla ends up cheaper. The Tesla owners almost certainly would be trading in sooner, shiny object complex. Repair costs remain to be seen.
Re: (Score:3)
So $89,000 car Minus 70,000 for your gas bill, leaves you enough money to buy and drive a $19,000 dollar for 800K miles?
I'm afraid I'll have to bow out. I'm not spending that much time in a $19,000 car. No thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just gas.
Ever had to replace a water pump in your car? Serpentine belt? Timing belt? Radiator leaks? Head Gasket? There are a LOT of things that can go wrong with internal combustion engines
Not that electric engines are indestructible by any stretch, but there are significantly less bits to fall off.
Re: (Score:2)
It only needs to recharge for 20 minutes. AND, in teh long run, the Total cost of ownership is way less than that "$30K" car. Difference is the cost basis is loaded up front. Look at what your monthly overall bills are for the life of your vehicle, including fuel and repairs, and you'll see that a Tesla is cheaper in the long run.
Well, considering repairs are usually more expensive for more expensive cars, I doubt that the Tesla saves you on anything but gas. And if driving 15k miles per year at 20 mpg while paying $4 per gallon, it would take 20 years to break even on your Tesla purchase. Considering you probably won't keep your Tesla for 20 years, I doubt it is cheaper in the long run.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about most people, but if I'm driving more than an hour or two, I'm renting a car so as not to put the miles on my own cars. I would never drive my commuter long distances
I do that for work trips but it doesn't work for me for vacation trips. When I drive home for Christmas (6.5 hr drive) in the Northeast we usually have snow, ice, etc. and I wouldn't trust the tires on a rental car as far as I could throw them. During the summer I need to tow stuff and, unfortunately, you cannot rent a tow vehicle...
Re: (Score:2)
You're not most people. Most people have a car in part so that they can make trips like those. A two or three-hour trip in a car turns into an epic on public transportation.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?
CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think expensive products for individuals aren't consumer products?
CR is not called "Thrifty Reports".
My definition of a consumer item is one that most people can afford, even if it is a tiny bit of a stretch. You have to admit that a $100,000 car is well outside of the price range of most consumers. I'm not saying that it has to be the cheapest POS that everyone can afford. Just that it should be, in my opinion, somewhat affordable...
Re: (Score:2)
vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??
Quote [topspeed.com]:
Despite all these challenges, a full seventy-six hours after leaving Los Angeles, the team rolled into New York City. The total trip was 3,427 miles and the team only spent 15 hours and 57 minutes tied to a charger.
So lets do the math: 76(Total time) - 16(charge time) = 60 hours drive time.
60h drive time is 4.75 greater than 16h charge time.
So somewhere your math went off the rails.
Of course most people sleep.
So they can charge at home or on the road at a slower rate without inconveniencing themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Your standards are low. Americans own over 1.2 cars per driver. So a 2-driver house has 2.4 cars, or about half of all 2-driver households have 3 cars.
With the statistics as they are, it seems you are the one that's out of touch.
Re: (Score:2)
So, the best car overall is a $100,000 luxury vehicle that can drive, at most, 4 hours and then needs to recharge for 5 hours??? Obviously Consumer Reports has a different set of standards than 99% of people who live in North America. .
CR uses a predetermined formula to rate their cars. Their formula puts heavy emphasis on fuel economy, safety, handling, comfort and practicality, and some emphasis on performance, and little or none on things like off-road capability. (As demonstrated by the Jeep Wrangler often coming in dead last in the past.) Other magazines for different audiences obviously use different weights for evaluating cars.
I don't think that they factor price into the formula at all. The formula says how objectively "good" the
Re: (Score:2)
And it starts at $50,000 (take-home price for most people.) Still well in to "luxury" territory for most people, but it's disingenuous to always refer to it as a $100K vehicle.
I can only go by what was printed in the article. If the true take home cost is $50,000 after rebates, tax deductions, etc. then that makes it more affordable. But I can't find anything that backs this figure up.
Re: (Score:2)
Stock Bump too (Score:5, Interesting)
The Consumer Reports article plus solid financial news and analyst forecasts [go.com] for Tesla today and widely circulating speculation about their planned Gigafactory [bloomberg.com] to be announced in a couple weeks with an aim of cutting battery costs by at least 50%, all lead to a surge in the stock today (2/25).
Even the confirmation that the Model X would indeed not surface until 2015 [cleantechnica.com] seemed to have no effect.
The stock was up as high as 17%, and closed up just under 14% (+$30 on the day to $248). With Morgan Stanley estimating a $320 price there is probably significant growth left, It seems they will have no problem funding that 5 to 7 Billion dollar battery plant. The "giga" refers to Tesla's need to build the equivalent of all of the world’s current production of lithium ion batteries under one factory roof. May be time to invest in on Lithium stocks as well.
Of course, the next drunk that crashes his car and lives to watch it burn will provide a stock dip, but that just sounds like importunity knocking.
Still, I predict Haters going to Hate. They should be arriving in about 3 seconds.....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I save my best proof reading for those who pay me. But you're welcome.
Tesla hate? (Score:2)
I have yet to meet anybody who thought Tesla "would be bankrupt and closed by now" who wasn't actively scheming toward that end. And yes, FUD counts as actively scheming.
Is Tesla great because they have to be? (Score:2)
Is Tesla and their cars great because they have to be -- selling a new kind of car at a high price to a customer base that demands to be catered to, in small enough quantities to care?
Or are they great because they're doing it better and even if some magic happens to the basic technology and they can sell a mid-sized sedan with model S specs in the mid-$40s will they still be great, or will they just devolve into yet another car company with all the car company shenanigans?
Or, to put it another way is the T
Re: (Score:2)
I was thoroughly impressed with the interior (Score:2)
I haven't driven one but played around with the interior at the mall. The human/car interface is by far the best one I've used. The multitouch screen is responsive and intuitive. The material quality is top of the line. I totally would buy one if I had the money.
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's part of their genius in using in-mall showrooms. Not only does it let them use a nice small space to show off their cars, they can put them where everybody will see the car and can come ask questions about it. Very few people will go to a dealership just to look at new models unless they already plan to buy one (partially, of course, because car dealers are often quite annoying people). Almost everybody goes to the mall, though, and if they can see first-hand how awesome a car Tesla makes, it
2013 Motor Trend Car of the Year (Score:4, Funny)
*ducks*
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Renault Alliance was Motor Trend's Car of the Year. My dad bought one and it sucked. I quit listening to anything they had to say after that.
In their defense: What other new cars were there in the early 80's? The Chrysler K-car? Maybe the Renault really was the best (least sucky) at the time.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla's on fire!
Is it the shoes? Boooom shakalaka!
One thing that gets overlooked (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First, you have to be able to upgrade. If you have 100 amp service, and you live in a dense residential neighborhood, you may not be able to upgrade to 200 amp service. You might just be SoL.
If you can upgrade, you have to pay a contractor to bless your new service connection, and you need to pay for the connection. You may well need a new panel, and you'll need a new circuit.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? (Score:2)
Actually i bought my subscription to Consumer Reports specifically because of the car reviews, and if i were to name the top two things that come to my mind when i think of them it would probably be cars and TVs.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't looked at a CR since the 1980's, but by then the aftermarket for high performance items were dying off somewhat.
But during the 1970's, there was a strong market for that stuff.
I can recall several reviews back then in different issues of several of the more popular 'racing seats' makers.
Recaro were one of the more popular 'racing seat' makers.(they were VERY nice!)
I actually used the CR article on a Recaro seat as a partial tie breaker when I bought mine in 1975 for my '69 Chevelle I raced Super S
CR - Credibility? (Score:3)
Consumer Reports has been reviewing cars forever, and I relied on them for my first two car purchases. Then I zeroed in on a Jeep (needed to get into the back country) and CR went out of its way to expressly say "DO NOT BUY THIS VEHICLE". I bought it anyway, and it was the best I've ever owned. Repair record was not perfect but still better than all those previously highly recommended vehicles, and the ergonomics were superior to anything I've have before or since. If that same model were still made today I'd buy another.
If you are looking to buy a new vehicle, ignore CR.
Re: (Score:3)
All you have done is show how worthless anecdotes are. I'm sure some people were perfectly happy with their Zunes, and a few Sinclair digital watches probably never broke down.
I'd take Consumer Report's advice over yours I'm afraid. They have more experience with a large number of vehicles over many decades, and most importantly if there are consistent problems with a model they will probably hear about it where as you only have one data point.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To be fair, you could spend $100k on a Merc or a BMW and get something that looks like a $40k Merc or BMW but is less reliable.
Re:Film at 11! (Score:5, Insightful)
Or you could spend three times that on a Bentley and have a reupholstered Volkswagen Phaeton that delivers all the mileage of a 1980s pickup truck (and is also less reliable).
Over priced as the Model S is, that price is going no where but down, and range is going to go up. [discovery.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Because more expensive doesn't mean better.
The Tesla Model S isn't better because it costs more, it's better because it's better.
An electric car with a powerful motor gets awesome acceleration, yet a quiet ride.
But its the car's electronics are better than any other car out there.
Plus a hundred grand is a lot of money, but its a number that doesn't require to be a 1% to be able to afford it, it's like a 10% or 15% richest person car.
The cheapest one at less than 60 grand after credits are affordable to mayb
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wanted to read TFA (no, I'm not new here) to see if they said anything about that... but apparently CR can't take a slashdotting? Lame.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually when you compare a non-hybrid SUV to a hybrid mileage-wise, they are more green because they save more gas. However, that's leaving unchallenged the customer's perceived need to buy an SUV in the first place (not that ther aren't some that do need one.)
Re: (Score:2)
the fact that electric cars are no greener than what the energy company uses to generate and transport electricity.
An electric vehicle powered entirely by coal generated electricity creates less pollution and CO2 than a Prius. Coal plants are rapidly being replaced by natural gas, which is far cleaner. West of the Mississippi, a much larger percentage of our power comes from nuclear and hydroelectric.
The current process of creating lithium ion batteries isn't as clean as we'd like. That's not a problem with electric vehicles. That's a problem with how we currently make those batteries.
Re:Toyota Prius was named the Best Green Car. (Score:5, Informative)
... that electric cars are no greener than what the energy company uses to generate and transport electricity.
What's funny is it would take someone only a few seconds to look up the relevant facts, but they never do. If someone is opposed to "green technology," they just let their confirmation bias decide that statements that align with their beliefs are obviously true. ICE engines are incredibly inefficient. All that noise that requires a muffler is wasted energy. All that heat that requires a radiator is wasted energy.Power plants are fairly efficient, as are electric motors. Don't believe me? Run the numbers:
Using the magical power of the internet [eia.gov], we can find out that a power plant burning petroleum produces 12.7 kWh per gallon. Tesla recently drove two Model S cars across the country (3,464.5 miles). The total energy consumed by both cars was 1197.8 kWh. It would take a power plant 94.3 gallons of gasoline (1197.8 kWh / 12.7 kWh / gallon) to generate the electricity used by both cars, so each car drove 3,464.5 miles on the equivalent of less than 48 gallons of gasoline. That's 72 MPG. What 5 seater, high performance, luxury hybrid gets 72 MPG?. It doesn't matter if the power plant is burring coal, power plants and electric motors are so freakin' efficient they blow everything else out of the water. Furthermore, it's much easier to scrub the exhaust of a power plant, than of a car.
And guess what, the US produces energy using all sorts of fuels: coal, natural gas, hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. Hybrids only burn gas, no alternative. Electric cars are green, get over it and stop spreading FUD to people too lazy to google reliable sources and perform simple math.
Re: (Score:3)
My typical powerstation is horrible at converting fossil fuels to electricity.
Now rain water, that it converts very well.
Re:Another Tesla story? (Score:5, Insightful)
Where are the other cars with interesting technology? Having stories for run of the mill ICE cars would be a mistake. But geeks do tend to be interested in EVs and AVs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Hennessey Venom GT's 270.49 mph run on the space shuttle landing strip was a far more interesting technological accomplishment than this, and completely ignored by the Slashdot editors.
It might be interesting for gear-heads. It's not interesting for geeks. Perhaps you're on the wrong site.
Why should a car somehow count as "interesting technology" because electricity makes it go? So what, golf carts can do that.
And if golf carts were new, they'd be interesting too.
Re: (Score:2)
I get the Slashdot love for autonomous cars. Running off of computer, pushing the limits of AI, society having to come to terms with legal and liability issues raised by new technology. Good stuff.
But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical. Because storing power in a battery gives it something in common with g
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Another Tesla story? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
But why should running off of electricity somehow make a car interesting? Because it's "new"? No, people have experimented with electric cars since the 19th century, the main difference now is we have batteries that make it semi-practical.
So you're saying there's something new now that wasn't possible before?
Seriously, what is so exciting about this car that it gets so many Slashdot stories?
Well, compare it to the other electric cars, and I don't mean golf carts or the ones that were being built in the 19th century. Compare the Model S to its contemporaries, who can and do use the same battery technology that makes electric cars feasible now. The Model S has a much larger range. The Model S accelerates faster. The Model S doesn't make the annoying high pitched sound the Prius does, and is relatively silent. The Model S
Re: (Score:2)
Lithium isn't that hard to extract. ICE cars have usually lousy acceleration starting out of the gate. Electricity can be generated from a lot of different sources.
Re: (Score:2)
We haven't had any major technological investments in propulsion of any type for a long time now, so going by your criteria we haven't had anything interesting happen in about 40 or 50 years now related to vehicular transportation.
Re: (Score:2)
People have known for a long time that putting enormous turbochargers into a small light car can make it go very fast. I like the Venom GT and read about it on /r/cars this week- but this isn't the right crowd.
Have you ever seen a golf cart do a quarter mile in 12.5 seconds? I haven't.
Re: (Score:2)
Elecrtic vehicles are 100+ years old. Though the second coming of them is much more interesting. The Tesla would replace the primary car in most US households without them hitting limitations on
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd argue that the new electronic (no mechanical link) steering and ability of the car to drive itself under certain conditions make the Infinity Q50 worthy of a mention. It's at least as geeky cool as coupling a battery to an electric motor.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, it's said to have vague and inconsistent steering feel and the hybrid doesn't get particularly exciting mileage. The Q50 is a yawn of a car.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I drive a yawn of a car (two, actually) - but it can't drive itself!
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I drive a yawn of a car (two, actually) - but it can't drive itself!
Anything less than fullly automated driving is just jerking off, and really a danger as it can lull a driver into a false sense of security. You can compare it to ABS, which certainly has its uses (for example, maintaining control of a vehicle while attempting to brake on snow or ice) but which also doesn't improve accident rates because people count on it to save their bacon in too many situations.
I look eagerly forward to completely self-driving automobiles, although I still think the proper technology fo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because in terms of geeky, nerdy topics of discourse, Tesla Model S pretty much is the perfect trifecta: environmentally clean, advanced (computer) technology, and cars. The only thing that's anywhere near as close is Google's autonomous car, but that only hits two of the three, and doesn't have nearly as much going on around it as the Model S currently does.
Oh yeah, Tesla is also something of an underdog, taking on Big Auto and Big Oil at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Consumer Reports controls the Nobel prize committee, or at least did in 2008? Whoa, when did that happen?
Re:This is old news (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Alright Mr. Pedantic, let me fix that headline for you:
"Consumer Reports Says Tesla Model S Is Best Overall Land-based Self-moving Street-legal Consumer Vehicle"
Re: (Score:2)
Best vehicle does not imply it can do everything every other vehicle can. If that was a necessary qualification, then no vehicle could ever be awarded a "best" award.
Re: (Score:3)
Ok. The Tesla S is the best vehicle that does not require either a ground support team, a special license or a two man crew.
Re: (Score:2)
expanding that to best vehicle is beyond absurd.
Not half as absurd as your examples.
Re: (Score:2)
CR didn't say it was the best vehicle on the planet, but the best overall car (assumption: within their test criteria).
Re: (Score:2)
You know, its priced at 89K, but that does not indicate its cost, so your analysis is at best flawed, and that's being generous.
Some things are priced simply to get what the market will bear.
Other things are priced to hold down demand, because they have only managed to build 30,000 of them, and they believe quality is more important than quantity.
Some things are priced to pay back the investment, so that they can expand and add new production capacity and build battery plants.
Somethings are priced high so t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla's are expensive due to:
1-Extensive Aluminum construction, Aluminum is called bottled electricity due to costing far more in electricity than anything else to make it. But Aluminum can be recycled. And electricity could come from solar, wind or nuclear. Steel pretty much needs to be made with coal (metalurgical coal), melting aluminium doesn't require putting all that electricity in again
2-Battery components are expensive, but much like Aluminum, can also be recycled
And yeah, Tesla is e
Re: (Score:3)
You're talking about a scam in a Tesla article and mention Le Car and the Nobel Peace Prize? Do you know what the definition of a scam is?
Re: (Score:2)
The cheapest Tesla can be had after credits for about 60 grand. It's just that most people don't want the small 40kWh (software limited 60kWh) battery.
Re: (Score:3)
Home version:
"It was on sale for 50% off, so I was able to buy it with the money I saved!"
Silicon Valley version:
"We lose $40 on each one but we make it up in volume!"
(see Osborne Computer [wikipedia.org])
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, every dollar spent on acquiring your vehicle is a dollar which has been burned as energy somewhere in the chain. Until renewable sources of energy come on line in a significant fraction, and are self perpetuating (i.e. the sources themselves produce most of the energy to produce), the truth is that every dollar spent has been (or will be) respent on energy. Coal is free, oil is free, gold is free, steel is free. What costs money is the extraction and processing, roylaties (profit for the resource
Re: (Score:2)
every dollar spent on acquiring your vehicle is a dollar which has been burned as energy somewhere in the chain.
That is not true at all. Some cars actually cost more to make than they do to sell, e.g. Lexus LFA. But those cars don't actually cost that much in energy; they have enormous numbers of man-hours. You have to account for the profit. Lexus might take a loss, but everyone they're buying components from is profiting and the profit isn't accounted for in energy expenditure.
Re: (Score:2)
A fully loaded Fusion Hybrid Energi Titanium is about $35K.
And from 50 feet away it's nearly indistinguishable from a Tesla.
It also has a gasoline engine that'll get me home when the batteries are depleted.
I've seen 'em, sat in them. I think it'd be a tough sell convincing me it's $55K better.
It's easily $55K better. Sorry.