55% Of Poll Respondents Choose Tesla Model 3 To Be Their Next Electric Car

1 year ago by Steven Loveday 126

Tesla Model 3 Rendering Via Stumpf Studio

Tesla Model 3 Concept Rendering Via Stumpf Studio

A recent survey of soon to be plug-in electric car buyers finds that 55% of those surveyed plan to make the Tesla Model their choice for their next electric car.

Tesla Model 3 Concept Rendering Via Stumpf Studio

Tesla Model 3 Concept Rendering Via Stumpf Studio

All three Tesla models fall in the top five slots of the survey. More specifically, the top choice, by a wide margin, was the company’s upcoming Model 3.

The top 6 vehicles in the survey:

Tesla Model 3, 55.28%

Nissan LEAF (2nd Gen), 32.75%

Tesla Model S, 20.20%

Chevy Volt (2nd Gen), 17.96%

Tesla Model X, 17.37%

Chevy Bolt, 17.29%

The list is long, but all other vehicles in the survey fell below the 10% mark.

The Tesla Model 3 is the front runner for many obvious reasons:

  • It’s a Tesla for the masses!
  • Affordability
  • 200+ miles range
  • Performance
  • Access to the Tesla Supercharger network
  • Over-the-air software updates
  • Autonomous driving options

To see survey results from an earlier article, Electric Cars: What Early Adopters & First Followers Want, showing the importance of certain factors to potential buyers, follow the link below.

Source: CleanTechnica

Tags: , ,

126 responses to "55% Of Poll Respondents Choose Tesla Model 3 To Be Their Next Electric Car"

  1. Philip d says:

    It’s telling that GM’S Bolt that will likely have superior performance and range to the 2nd Gen Leaf has half as many potential buyers.

    People haven’t even seen the Leaf yet and they are prepared to pick it over the Bolt. GM needs to figure out how to market their EVs better cause they ain’t Tesla.

    1. David says:

      It would help if GM would support public charging. They come out with what sounds like a great car, then deflate it by not supporting charging, so you end up with a 200 mile range car that can’t go anywhere beyond your local commute. GM has to be more consistently pro-EV to get over their EV1 actions.

      1. Rick Danger says:

        Once again, Tesla shows legacy auto makers how it’s done; you take some of your marketing budget and you spend it on fast chargers. Tesla is smart enough to realize that every Tesla branded supercharger stall is an advertisement for their brand, and, oh yeah, it also solves the RANGE ISSUE.
        GM will spend thousands on billboards but nothing on branded chargers that can provide as much name exposure.

        1. ffbj says:

          Yes, and instead of trying to submarine, sideswipe, Tesla through bills and buying state legislatures, spend that money on something positive.
          Always great to hear from you Rick.
          “Keep em’ Flying.”

          1. Rick Danger says:

            You too! Always enjoy your comments.

          2. CopperRoad says:

            To me GM’s recent anti (Tesla) direct sales maneuverings are more a show of support for GM dealers, in return for dealerships actually pushing the upcoming Bolt, and Volt, etc. Quid pro quo, if you will. Just like Mary Barra’s Tesla swipe at CES was a very public support for dealerships — when she touted GM’s vast network of dealers during the Bolt unveiling. Dealers are afraid. And they should be. But right or wrong, I can see why GM would employ such a strategy since legacy car manufacturers are so intertwined, and beholden to the dealer network.

            It would be nice if GM would do something, anything, in regards to quick charge proliferation. I feel like they might, but to what extent who knows.

            1. sven says:

              That’s an interesting take on the situation.

            2. Jacked Beanstalk says:

              Well the dealers missed the memo on it. Last week I went to test drive a Volt and they only had one in stock that was already sold. The sales droid let me sit in it and then tried to sell me a Malibu.

              I told him I would never buy a Volt from a dealer that is afraid to sell them.

            3. John says:

              I was at a dealership last week looking at a used 2013 Volt for my wife.

              The salesman kept trying to remind me that “those batteries are pushing 4 years old…you sure you wanna take that kind or risk?”

              After he tried selling me a Malibu and a Cruze that I shot down by asking “what’s their all electric range?” he finally mentioned that he thought there was a new Volt coming, maybe, but he didn’t know anything about it.

              The dealers really aren’t behind EV’s at all. There is no money post-sale for them.

              52,000 miles on my Volt and I’ve been to the dealer exactly twice. Once for recalls, and once for an oil change and a recall.

              1. Mister G says:

                Dealers are addicted to oil.

                1. TomArt says:

                  oil changes, yes. 🙂

        2. Michael Will says:

          I saw a level2 charger free to use GM branded and with Volt advertisement in Fremont, CA at a lunch spot strip mall. So I think the floated the idea and are testing it out. Charged my VW eGolf for free while having lunch.

          1. Anon says:

            Fremont would be THE place to get that kind of posturing noticed by folks at Tesla.

            Pretty sure it didn’t make much of an impression, though. 😉

    2. R.S. says:

      Well, I guess that most people that took place in the survey have seen the IDS concept, so they might assume that the next Leaf will be something like that. Add a better charging infrastructure and the fact that Nissan tends to sell EVs cheaper than the competition and you get a pretty nice car.
      Of course its hard to say if the next gen Leaf will be as good as people think.
      But since they haven’t released any hard facts there is more space for optimism, than with the mostly known Bolt.
      Its basically the same with the Model 3, we can only speculate how good it will be, but the mere reputation of a Tesla badge makes us think its going to be good.

    3. DonC says:

      No one ever went broke overestimating the intelligence of the American EV buyer. LOL Actually I suspect it’s just an awareness issue which may well resolve itself once the Bolt EV shows up in the flesh, so to speak.

      1. Zim says:

        Also, no one ever made a profit by selling EV’s.

        Tesla might make it but they are spending/investing for rapid growth and it’s difficult to estimate whether or not they could consistently post profits if they had a different business strategy. To some extent if you read between the lines, they seem to imply that their only chance is to go big or fold. They seem to feel that they need to be as big as Porsche in a few years or else they won’t make it.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          Zim said:

          “Tesla might make [profits] but they are spending/investing for rapid growth and it’s difficult to estimate whether or not they could consistently post profits if they had a different business strategy.”

          I don’t think it’s particularly difficult to make out that if Tesla wasn’t spending lots of money to expand their business, they’d be comfortably cash-flow positive. Tesla’s gross profit margin is comfortably above the average for auto makers.

          If Tesla used the same business model as Aston Martin or Porsche or Jaguar or Bentley, nobody would be saying ridiculous things like “Tesla is unprofitable” or “Tesla is losing money on every car”.

          Fortunately for Mother Earth, Tesla has bigger ambitions.

          1. DonC says:

            Yes Tesla is spending a lot of money developing its new models. But all manufacturers do that. If they didn’t have to do that they’d be incredibly profitable. Tesla may be expanding faster on a percentage basis but the number of models and the spend is likely quite low by industry standards. The majors can introduce 10 or 15 models a year, which will eat up a lot of cash on new introductions and refreshes.

            Because it’s hard to compare what’s happening at companies of such different size and scale you have to be careful with the comparisons.

            1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

              You make some good points, and yes the viewpoint you present is just as valid as the one I presented.

              However, I think you exaggerate when you say that major auto makers develop 10 or 15 new models all at once. That may be true for GM, but only if you count that as one auto maker rather than multiple ones (Chevy, Cadillac, Buick, GMC, etc.). I recall reading a post not so long ago which said major auto makers typically have only 3 or 4 genuinely new models in development at any time. If I recall correctly, that was posted by Jay Cole, who certainly seems to know what he’s talking about on the subject.

            2. Nathanael says:

              Tesla isn’t just spending money developing entirely new platforms, Tesla is also spending money *building new factories*, which the major automakers do *very* rarely since it’s so expensive.

              They’re not really spending that much on R&D compared to the big companies. But they’re making only 50,000 cars per year.

              They have to be selling a lot more cars than that per year to cover the R&D on a sustainable basis. So they’re planning to do that.

        2. Nathanael says:

          “To some extent if you read between the lines, they seem to imply that their only chance is to go big or fold.”
          That’s not an implication. They’ve said so in no uncertain terms.

    4. JakeY says:

      People in the EV crowd have a lot more awareness of the Leaf than any GM EV (GM’s last one was the Spark EV and I doubt much people know about it).

      GM marketing will just have to put more effort into it.

  2. Mxs says:

    Where was the survey done? Streets of Fremont, or somewhere in the heart of Michigan???

    When I first came here for EV news, you guys looked like wide range online independent blog …. Lately you start looking like insidetesla.com …. Posting survey results with highly questionable criteria with basically embedded Tesla 3 specs …. Way to go, really.

    I get it, it’s tempting and nail biting prior to model 3 release, but try not to lose your face because of it.

    1. CopperRoad says:

      +1

    2. ffbj says:

      I don’t see it. I mean, the survey it was conducted by Clean Technica, surveying prospective ev buyers that visit their website. Pretty easy to understand. Miss Scarlett in the Kitchen, with the rope. Clues. Maybe you should get one.

      1. Rick Danger says:

        I was one of them who took the survey, and incidentally, I also maintain negative views of GM 🙂
        See my reply to David below.

    3. Will says:

      I think you’re seeing too far into it. It’s just a survey. And InsideEVs are just reporting on the results. It’s that simple.

    4. Lad says:

      What’s telling here is the trust that’s exhibited in Tesla. After buying a Leaf and being treated by Nissan as just another gasser buying sucker, I won’t buy another. That that many people will actually buy a car based on Tesla’s reputation, sight unseen is…well…that’s amazing.

      1. Nathanael says:

        Tesla has developed an *amazing* brand value and reputation. And they’ve made some major mistakes and screwups along the way, but they’ve still come out ahead of the competition. If they fix all the mistakes and screwups, they could becom,e even more successful.

    5. HeisenberghtNUTS says:

      Well it also sometimes appears to me that insideevs is a bit Tesla centric. And mostly pro Tesla. On the other hand, this is just logic. Is there any other EV manufacturer worth reporting that much? It’s an EV website so we can’t blame them for reporting on model 3.

      Better blame them for reporting new colors of BMW or vaporware from VW (+Audi) or copyware from Daimler.

      I think we all are waiting quite a lot for more info on model 3. Let them feed us, even if it’s just tidbits…

      1. Jay Cole says:

        …its a calm thread (mostly) so figured why not wade into this discussion one time.

        Honestly we go wherever there is news. Of late that has been Tesla quite often.

        So yes, Tesla has been in overdrive the last few weeks no doubt – Model X open deliveries, autopilot, 100 kWh batteries, Gigafactory developments, Model 3, etc..and unlike other OEMs Tesla doesn’t just roll up to NYAIS and put all the cards on the table and go away until the next event, Tesla rolls it out slowly, in little bit-sized portions. As we report EVERYTHING in the segment, we cover it all. We have had what, 4 updates/emails/press releases from Tesla on the Model 3 this month already?

        Overall though, I think you will find we cover the entire EV segment, and the stuff that many would consider marginal/regional, things that all the other outfits would not invest the time and resources to learn and/or develop a relationship with those OEMs. We do understand it is a big world out there, and we try to cater to it all to some degree.

        So yes, lots of Tesla of late, lots of Model 3 (and that is likely to continue through April), but that in no way affect the volume of the rest of the coverage, just means there is more. If we were focusing on Tesla/Model 3 at the expense of other stuff then one could say that was an issue, but that is not the case. Just over the last say 48 hours (with one day also being a holiday), here is some of the other stuff we also covered:

        -bus charging infrastructure in Europe
        -world ev rallycross
        -Jaquar XJ plug-in
        -new i3 color
        -EV battery supplier recap
        -Outlander PHEV
        -Formula E drivetrains
        -California e-car sharing scene
        -Nissan/Ghosn press conference on CC
        -Prius Prime op-ed
        -Zero Motorcycles/Bob Burnquist/Xgames
        -Kia Plug-In Hybrid
        -Renault EV scene in Europe
        -BYD/London bus EV
        -Volt award
        -BMW gathering/Guiness attempt
        -Proterra buses

        What is true, is that Tesla news/stories seem to often time elicit very strong emotions. It is hard to say if that is due to their position in the auto/EV market as a disrupter/spotlight taker, or the financial attention the company itself receives (long vs short).

        One thing is for sure, there is very few people on the middle ground, so if a story is either seen as positive (such as this 3rd party report on the Model 3 sentiment) or negative (last week’s 3rd party/Consumer Reports negative outlook on Model S), persons will appear saying the author of the piece (or IEV) has a particular bias. Nothing we can do about that.

        I will say, if someone really doesn’t have an interest in reading, they just don’t read the story, and they certainly don’t comment – they just move on to what does interest them. Heck, just wait 30 mins or so, there is another story coming.

        If someone reads, takes the time to comment and says “Hey you guys are running too much of XXX…” then that is motivated out of a specific opinion on the story, which has garnered their interest, and ultimately an opposition to the position that a particular author has taken up. It’s really nothing personal to us…we get that and don’t take it that way, we don’t expect to be able to deliver on everyone’s dream newsfeed.

        1. Speculawyer says:

          Tesla very wisely doles out information in small pieces in order to keep a steady flow of free press. And as long as there really is some new information or something entertaining, it is worth a story for each. So keep cranking out those articles.

          If other companies want more press, they should do the same.

          1. Anon says:

            I agree. It would be nice to have more BEV news in general…

          2. ffbj says:

            There is little doubt that Tesla knows how to milk a story and keep themselves in the spotlight, chum the waters to cause a feeding frenzy. For instances: the Model III presentation story, the introduction of the “D”, Roll out of the “X”.

        2. GSP says:

          I do appriciate the wide and complete EV coverage here at Inside EVs.

          Thanks Jay and team for all that you do.

          GSP

          1. David says:

            I agree. I’ve been following InsideEVs for years and its one of the most informative and unbiased EV sites that allows open discussion.
            Unfortunately most other sites are brand specific and are prone to shut down discussions that don’t support their brand. gm-volt being the worst, but I’ve seen similar at teslamotorsclub. MyNissanLeaf is the opposite and often has discussions trashing the LEAF, in many cases rightly so because of battery degradation.

        3. kdawg says:

          We need more Twizy articles, dagnabit!
          🙂

          1. Jay Cole says:

            You might get your wish, some Renault execs invited us to a “thing” in Montreal, Que for the debut of Twizy 40 in Canada the third week of April.

            I always enjoy/have a good time in Montreal…but if Renault, would let me just buy a Twizy and drive away, I’d be there for sure. I know it makes no sense in northern US/Canada, but I really enjoy driving them, and I don’t care, (=

      2. Nathanael says:

        ” Is there any other EV manufacturer worth reporting that much”

        BYD. They’re doing just as much aggressive expansion and construction as Tesla. But most of the reporting on it is in Chinese, so we don’t hear about it.

    6. Nate says:

      I disagree Mxs.

      Insideevs is pretty fair between Tesla, GM, and Nissan. Most articles from all sources will be about the Model 3 this week. Its importance to the industry is significant.

    7. notting says:

      To be honest: The Model 3 it IMHO the currently at least announced vehicle that would meet my criterias best (Chevrolet Bolt (as Opel [whatever]) AFAIK isn’t announced for Germany yet). Although, there are many things I don’t like (e.g. many visible/feelable software changes all the time, I think there won’t be a SC flat (anymore quite quickly), extremely thin network of stores and service (and Ranger service is very expensive and you can’t buy the Ranger flat anymore…) etc.).

      But: I also asked myself if there was asked for unannounced vehicles like a Megane Z.E.
      In other words: If you current favorite ICE car maker would offer something you would buy with ICE, would you also buy it as BEV/PHEV/etc. with a range of at least xxxkm? Then the survey would look completely different – with far less Model 3.

      notting

    8. Jim Whitehead says:

      I agree, the survey is mathematically ridiculous as it adds to more than 130%. If you normalize it to 100%, the number who want a Tesla drops to a bit under 50%.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        If you look at the CleanTechnia article, the survey question clearly states you can choose more than one car.

        Instead of the headline “55% Of Poll Respondents Choose Tesla Model 3 To Be Their Next Electric Car”, a more accurate label for this InsideEVs article would be “55% Of Poll Respondents Indicate Interest in Tesla Model ≡ as their Next Electric Car”.

        But then, the CleanTechnia headline for their article is just as inaccurate: “~55% Of EV Enthusiasts Likely To Buy/Lease Tesla Model 3”

  3. ffbj says:

    I think this survey is inclined to favor the Model III by design, since it was conducted by a website that probably has many visitors that maintain negative views of GM. Quite understandably. I would imagine the Bolt will do better than the survey suggests.

    1. Rick Danger says:

      I applaud GM’s EV engineers, it’s GM’s management that needs an attitude adjustment.

      1. Anon says:

        There are a lot of non-GM engineers that worked on the BOLT– and they’re located in South Korea. GM should be IMMENSELY thankful for them to take on the more challenging BEV aspects of this particular vehicle and help rush it to market.

        1. Rick Danger says:

          Good point Anon.

        2. sven says:

          If only a lot of non-Tesla engineers had worked on the Model X- specifically those located in Toyota City, Japan. Tesla would have been IMMENSELY thankful for them taking on the more challenging fit, finish, and reliability aspects of this particular vehicle, and helping Telsa rush it to market without the quality and design problems that the Model X is besieged with.

          1. Raf says:

            Come off it Sven! Specifics? .. please and thank you!

            1. sven says:

              Here a link someone else posted in the Tesla Factory Tour Reveal “Stunning Progress” news story from today:

              https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/horrible-horrible-and-terrible-day.66202/

              This Model X owner has only had his car for a couple of hours. His driver-side door won’t open, his passenger-side door won’t close, his driver’s side falcon-wing door is misaligned when closed, Tesla “forgot” to paint part of the door on both the driver’s side door and the passenger’s side door, he has scratches on the paint job, and his wheel alignment is off.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                I read through all the posts. Its pretty bad when TMC regulars start talking about the California Lemon Law.

                Regardless on how you view the Cadillac ELR’s appearance (most people like it better than I do, to be honest), I have to say the doors and the trunk have always operated flawlessly, even on the coldest, iced-up days. All latches are solenoid operated, and all ‘buttons’ are electric switches.

                They all have a very satisfying heavy-duty ‘clunk’ to them, making you think they will never wear out.

                I fear for any model X’s in my area.

                IF they are having trouble in warm weather, how will these issues possibly be resolved in cold climates – something which just have to be put on the back burner at Tesla.

                Releasing a $120,000 or more car with these problems? I don’t know pricing but one blogger said it is $140,000.

                Whatever happened to build it right the first time concept?

                It seems to me that ModelXBoy’s vehicle will be constantly in the body shop. If the factory cannot get things to work right when the car is brand new, how is the body shop going to get things right other than continually tinkering with things?

                1. kdawg says:

                  Tesla build issues is one of my major hold-backs for buying a Model 3 over a Bolt. I have so much more confidence the in the build quality of the Bolt. It just comes down to if the Supercharger network is worth the risk of possible build issues.

                2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

                  Bill Howland said:

                  “Its pretty bad when TMC regulars start talking about the California Lemon Law.”

                  Seriously? Are you actually going to try to tell us that the very same discussions don’t occur on forums dedicated to discussion of Chevys, Fords, Toyotas, and in fact every auto maker that mass produces cars today?

                  There is a reason lemon laws exist… and have been around since long before anybody ever heard of Tesla Motors.

                  Enough with the Tesla bashing, already!

                  1. Bill Howland says:

                    Oh, I take Tesla very seriously. You’re the silly one. Just more verbal drivel from someone who knows nothing, and would never buy an electric car anyway.

              2. Yeah, It was me who tried to help out ModelXBoy and others in a similar situation by making them aware of the Lemon law in CA. Many of the Model Xs are turning out to be lemons, as Tesla crams ill-finished products out the door before the Mar 31 deadline.
                MoldeXBoy spent a whopping $160K on his car! He shouldn’t have to live with a Lemon.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Yes, you made an intelligent response, since its an issue of serious concern. Too bad you have to share the space here with a clown who has no idea the expense and effort one has to go through to obtain an electric car, since its been years and he hasn’t even bought a cheap used one yet.

          2. Anon says:

            We’ve had this same discussion about your willingness to hang with the dark side. Your short term memory should recall that Model S had initial production issues that were corrected. Model X is no different

            When your slice of the world becomes perfect and flawless, and you get bored of no one pushing any boundaries or innovating, and regurgitating the same products and designs over and over– drop by for a visit. 🙂

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Well, Maybe ModelXboy’s trouble, and others like his can be laughed off, but to me, a $120-140K vehicle is a LOT of money.

              Maybe this guy is so well-healed he can just laugh it off. If it were me, I’d cry.

              I went through a bit of this with my Roadster, especially as it got very cold outside, but the Roadster seems far more finished a product that the “X”. I ordered the car with zero options, (a rarity – no one at Tesla knew how to put a cd in the cheap radio since everyone usually orders something better), so I didn’t spend anywhere near as much cash as Model X signature owners have spent.

              Sven’s ‘dark side’ post is very informative. If I was a prospective buyer of any high-priced vehicle I’d want to know all the problems, and the degree of rectification prior to making the purchasing decision.

              1. Nathanael says:

                Nobody should EVER buy a car from the first 500 or so off the production line, unless they’re willing to put up with poor build quality.

                This has been true for every manufacturer. I was warned about this by my friends who grew up in Michigan.

                Tesla is no different. Build quality for the first 500 off the line is poor; it gets better.

                For the Model 3, Tesla is cleverly assigning most of the early ones off the line to employees.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Oh, I bet the 500th ELR was perfectly fine. Ultimately, they only made one or two thousand of them anyway.

                  The body on the ELR is totally different than the one on the Volt, being much larger, as a for instance.

                  There was a time about 20 years ago when a Cadillac’s fit and finish was horrible.

                  Now with my ELR, I haven’t had a single issue with it. I suspect it was much the same with the 500th buyer.

                  In all the negative comments of the ELR, of which some are rightly deserved, and some I’ve made myself:

                  1). “Its too small”
                  2). “Its underpowered”
                  3). “Its too expensive”
                  4). “The automatic controls drive you nuts”
                  5). “The marketing for the car is dumb”
                  6). “The car is such a dog, many dealers won’t even carry the car”

                  IN all the negative responses, you never see anything bad about the car’s reliability or fit and finish. Thankfully that new mindset at Cadillac in particular, and GM in general, is refreshing. Its the way it should always have been.

          3. ffbj says:

            Had to laugh!

  4. Will says:

    From a UK point of view, Chevy has no brand loyalty, so if we had to choose between Chevy or Tesla, most people would choose Tesla, because we’d do our research and learn Tesla has far better after-care.

    1. AlphaEdge says:

      Just some perspective: It’s a $100,000 car with really expensive service plans.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        I can’t speak from personal experience, having never owned a car even in the ballpark of a $100,000 price tag, but from posts written by those who do, it seems that Tesla’s maintenance fees and expenses are very significantly less than similar ones from other auto makers. According to at least one post I recall, it averages about 25% of what others charge.

  5. evcarnut says:

    I agree.. & mary mary Quite contrary., Should stop giving Tesla Shots every time she talks EV’s ..0nly because her company is too Sub-Par to Tesla! Cheers!

  6. Mike says:

    The lack of enthusiasm for the Bolt could be that not many people are interested in a sub-compact.

    1. Rich says:

      $37K subcompact.

    2. Anon says:

      GM does have that certain historical LOVE / HATE thing with EV’s, they __STIL__ have to overcome in the Retail BEV Space…

      Similar example is the Toyota Rav4, with Tesla Battery and Drivetrain. No one bought the vehicle since it didn’t have a DCFC option, or solid company product support (Toyota).

    3. Bill Howland says:

      “not interested in a sub-compact”.

      The Bolt is listed as a “Mid-size Wagon”.

      Some people say it is larger than a model S, but then I’m not sure how usable the Bolt’s cubic feet are in every day driving.

      But if you need to move something and fold the rear seats down, it has 56 cubic feet of space.

  7. Dave S. says:

    I love our Volt and I was going to replace it with gen 2. After the Bolt reveal we decided that will be out next car. The wife was going to wait for the model 3, but honestly I would imagine we can lease the Bolt for 2 or 3 years then get the Tesla. I’d like to be wrong, but late 2017 means they’ll deliver 1 car in 2017.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      …or that despite Tesla’s best efforts, the first production Model ≡ won’t roll off the line until mid-2018, which is my guess.

      Only six months late would be a significant improvement for Tesla, after the Model S being 2 years late and the Model X being equally late, or even moreso.

      And yes, I know that Tesla’s business depends a lot on getting the Model ≡ into production on time. But the same was true of the Model S, and they missed that badly.

      1. Nathanael says:

        Model S production was delayed by at least one year due to delays in purchasing the factory. I was keeping track of that at the time.

        I think Musk decided that it was more important to get the right factory for the right price than to get model S out on time. That was clearly an actual decision they made. Because the factory purchase was delayed by over a year from the first point when they *could have* bought a factory. They did get a great deal.

  8. Nix says:

    Well, it is much easier to want a mythical vehicle that only exists in everybody’s personal imaginations, than it is to dedicate to actual vehicles with all their flaws exposed to the world.

    At this point, I want a Model 3. But I fully realize that I’m projecting all kinds of positive wishes about what I’m HOPING the car will be, onto a car that I’ve never seen. Once I actually drive one, I might change my mind.

    I’m still going to put a deposit down on one though….

  9. This is a very dubious survey on a pro-tesla site. Tesla fans and share holders probably voted 10 times each. Remember the “crazy off-the-hook” powerwall orders last year? Well, now that product is no longer offered, even before it was launched.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Tesla is still selling a PowerWall. It was only one specific type of PowerWall which was discontinued. The type cancelled was designed for use only as an emergency backup in case of power failure, not for everyday cycling.

      Tesla is also selling the larger, commercial/industrial scale PowerPack… and apparently getting a lot of customers for that.

    2. Anon says:

      Did you not just see photos of lots of powerwalls and storage system racks at the Gigafactory?

      Where do you get your information???

  10. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    I’m certainly a Tesla fan, but there’s nothing in this article about the survey’s methodology. Just who was surveyed, and how?

    The article says:

    “A recent survey of soon to be plug-in electric car buyers finds that 55% of those surveyed plan to make the Tesla Model their choice for their next electric car.”

    The sticking point here is “55% of those surveyed“. If this was an opt-in online survey — that is, only the answers of those who bothered to respond online were counted — then that’s not a scientifically valid survey. A valid survey would be one which picks people at random (such as a telephone survey, or a survey conducted at a mall) and asks them all the same questions, regardless of their interest — or lack of interest — in EVs.

    If this was an opt-in, online survey of CleanTechnia readers, conducted not long after the website ran articles praising the coming Model ≡, then this is less an indication of how many people want a Model ≡, and more an indication of the power of unpaid advertising on regular readers of the site.

    Mind you, I don’t at all object to CleanTechnia, or InsideEVs, giving Tesla Motors free advertising. I’m a big fan, and I eat it up — most of it, anyway. (I think there is excessive coverage of drag racing, 0-60 times, and aftermarket body customizations). But I’d never make the mistake of thinking that the average potential car buyer has the same mindset of a regular reader of InsideEVs or CleanTechnia.

  11. Filip says:

    The study exceeds 100%. Seems legit…

  12. ModernMarvelFan says:

    Based on this “crappy” survey results, I would say that all you Bolt critics out there should apologize about your nasty criticism against GM for not targeting more than 50K Bolt per year.

    Look at it, “nobody wants it”. So, as I said often, until there is a show of demand, you can’t fault GM for only produce 50K Bolt. People who love EVs are mostly Tesla lovers/fan boys. Beside them, not much left for the remaining of the EV market.

    1. Anon says:

      Not sure I agree with that observation. I would venture a guess that if someone else built and sold the Bolt (or a vehicle just like it), more people would be willing to buy it, without the GM Logo / historical baggage attached. Do not underestimate the hate some people have for some legacy brands.

      So, 50k vehicles for GM, sure. But maybe 150 – 250k units, for someone else selling a nearly identical product at the same or slightly less price point? Seems far more likely.

      GM tends to taint its own meat, if you get my drift… And they seem to be aware of it.

      1. sven says:

        Anon said:
        “Do not underestimate the hate some people have for some legacy brands.”

        After reading your comments about GM on InsideEVs over the years, I will NEVER underestimate the hate some people have for some legacy brands. 😉

      2. ModernMarvelFan says:

        “So, 50k vehicles for GM, sure. But maybe 150 – 250k units, for someone else selling a nearly identical product at the same or slightly less price point? Seems far more likely.”

        So, you are just supporting the GM point that they won’t be able to sell more than 50K Bolt or there is no demand for “GM Bolt”.

        Thanks for playing.

        That is the problem with EV community which is made up of a bunch of idiots who like to hold their hatred rather than the goods of community. No wonder the rest of the world think we are bunch of “greenie idiots”….

        1. Bill Howland says:

          Hehe, yeah. They complain that GM ‘doesn’t know how to make vehicles’ or doesn’t ‘market’ them well enough, or develops crappy designs.

          But then, when the vehicle is available for sale in the area where they live:

          “Its not good enough.”
          “I don’t want a GM product.”
          “I’ll wait for a Tesla.”.

          And then they complain that GM isn’t making enough EV’s. Never dawns on them that somebody somewhere actually has to BUY a vehicle from them to make them want to produce more.

          How many Tesla Fanboys actually have paid their own money to purchase one?

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      ModernMarvelFan said:

      “all you Bolt critics out there should apologize about your nasty criticism against GM for not targeting more than 50K Bolt per year.”

      Actually, GM said they plan to produce only 20-30 thousand in the first year. I guess that’s even “nastier”. 😉

      And after the news broke about GM backing a Indiana State effort to block Tesla’s direct sales, I doubt many here who have positive feelings toward Tesla feel overly regretful about any negative comments we have directed at GM. “As you sow, so shall you reap.”

      “People who love EVs are mostly Tesla lovers/fan boys.”

      I’m sure that will come as news to Nissan, which sold more than 60,000 Leafs in one year. Tesla has yet to equal that.

      But if most EV lovers are Tesla fans… maybe you should ask yourself why that’s true.

  13. pjwood1 says:

    Next EV buyers prefer:
    -access to Supercharger network
    -access to Supercharger network
    -access to Supercharger Network

  14. Dan Hue says:

    I’m really curious about the Model 3 announcement. If it underwhelms, I can’t wait for the whining and apologetics. If the car lives up to the hype, what will it do to Model S sales? Tesla is playing a big game, no doubt about it.

    1. Anon says:

      If they show anything you can sit in and stream a video of a peppy test drive, it will sell like hotcakes.

      If they present a bare tube frame, with a motor and messy hand-wired battery array welded onto bare sheet metal– then I’ll laugh. 😀

      No no!!! Elon has to come out on stage with a DRY ERASE BOARD, that’s it! And start sketching a squiggly, ill-proportioned PICTURE of the MODEL III!!!

      That would be HYSTERICAL! OMG, I would so die. 😀

      1. Anon….”Elon has to come out on stage with a DRY ERASE BOARD, that’s it! And start sketching a squiggly, ill-proportioned PICTURE of the MODEL III!!!”

        What would be fun to watch is actually that…Elon on a whiteboard skething the first designs that he wanted, then the chief deigner joining him with anothe easel and white board and adding his ideas, bothe on a darkened stage, with spotlights on just them, and close ups of them sketching projected onto the big screen, and the lights on them fade, as the screen shows renditipn after rendition? Then sounds of metal stamping, riveting, welding, and then the screen rises to show another scrre behind that, and people see the Model 3 arriving on stage!!

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Dan Hue asked:

      “If the car lives up to the hype, what will it do to Model S sales?”

      Undoubtedly increase them, due to all the attention Tesla will get over the Model ≡ Reveal and media hype.

      I seriously doubt BMW saw sales of its 5-series drop when it started selling the 3-series! It puzzles me that people think that basic rules of upscale vs. downscale market demand somehow won’t work for Tesla.

    3. Nathanael says:

      “If the car lives up to the hype, what will it do to Model S sales?”

      Nothing. It’ll reduce demand for Model S, but Model S is still production-limited.

      The key is that Model S is a much, much larger car than Model 3. They really appeal to different people based on that. I’m sure some people who wanted a smaller car were buying Model S because Model 3 didn’t exist yet — but I think the loss of that market won’t be enough to impact model S sales, since they’re still production-limited rather than demand-limited.

      I do think Model S sales have basically topped out now. People switching from other LARGE cars to model S will be balanced out by people switching from model S to model 3.

  15. Three Electrics says:

    The beauty of polling a car with no details is that every respondent can project their hopes and dreams into it. In the absence of information, the car fits their needs perfectly.

  16. Kevin C. says:

    GM needs to encourage/support local Utilities and businesses that would benefit from DC fast chargers. Heck,even Red State utilities like Idaho Power and Nevada Energy love EVs. Republican govenor Sandoval of Nevada has pledged to support their Electric Highway program . It ain’t rocket science dammit Ms.Barra.

    1. Anon says:

      This goes waaayyy back to an earlier thread where I break down purchasing decisions by simply asking questions like:

      Q: Why does GM build cars?

      A: To make money.

      That answer also explains why this legacy company can’t grasp why spending a percentage of PROFIT from sales, directly back into INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT SAID PRODUCT, is rational– from a traditional, short term economic standpoint.

      GM openly accuses Tesla of losing money on every car sale, when they see them spending so much dosh on their SuperCharger Network, Gigafactory, Intensive R&D, etc.. It truly blows their MBA minds. This is something they would much rather NOT do. In fact, most of their BEV work for the Bolt, was done in South Korea, by LG Engineers– not Detroit Michigan people. GM couldn’t get much more hands off on developing this thing.

      So, I don’t see GM switching gears to suddenly becoming open to spending on EV infrastructure quickly, or in a substantial global way like Tesla–other than setting up a L2 someplace in Fremont with their logo on it, just to poke at their competition.

      GM looks at it like everyone is suddenly asking them to build a coast-to-coast network of Gas Stations. So they naturally balk at the idea. Why should THEY have to shoulder the cost of that, alone? Right?

      That’s not really the paradigm anymore, but that’s where their corporate mindset is stuck. And for various other reasons, won’t join Tesla’s SuperCharger network, even though it would make beautiful BEV synergy.

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        But improving a nationwide network of fast charging stations is exactly the opposite of what GM wants. It doesn’t want to make EVs more attractive or more competitive. Why would GM want to encourage anyone to buy a Bolt or a Volt, when they make so little (if any) profit on them? They’d much rather encourage new car buyers to buy one of their much more profitable gasmobiles.

        From GM’s viewpoint, helping to build out the Supercharger network, or something similar, would be shooting their profit margin in the foot.

  17. Mxs says:

    I am glad I was not by far the only who had a problem with this fishy survey.

    Perhaps I was too harsh with insideev.com, and the love fest with anything Tesla is skewing a bit things.

    But good journalist would question the very same things many readers have. If we can figure it out in 5 mins of reading a short post why the writer could have not done the same?

    I still think it was seen as an opportunity … And I am not naive at the end of the day it is business …. If Tesla’s car is a flop, the site will dwindle to irrelevance over time. If it is a success it’s a shot in the arm for everyone.

    But do note that Tesla cannot be helped by fishy articles, their destiny is in their own hands. The 3 will flop and the company will be gone quickly and so all the down payments. If it’s a success, everyone will be smiling except for the other companies caught sleeping.

    I wish them well and will watch with interest.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      Mxs said:

      “If Tesla’s car is a flop, the site will dwindle to irrelevance over time. If it is a success it’s a shot in the arm for everyone.”

      If Tesla disappeared tomorrow, the EV revolution would continue. It would almost inevitably slow, but eventually some other “young turk” EV maker would rise to take its place.

      And I think you’re being rather unfair to the InsideEVs staff here. There is great interest in the EV enthusiast community about Tesla and its cars. Why should InsideEVs not cover every bit of news it can possibly gather about Tesla Motors and its cars?

      The reason InsideEVs gets such a high volume of traffic is because they usually post numerous articles per day. There’s a lot of content here, and that keeps people coming back.

      And while I agree that it would be nice if there was more analysis in many if not most InsideEVs articles, no resource is unlimited. If InsideEVs writers and editors spent more time on each article, on average, then they wouldn’t have enough time to post as many articles as they do. Perhaps you would find that preferable. Perhaps I would find that preferable. But we don’t work at InsideEVs. I’m a firm believer in this philosophy: Those who do the work get to decide how it gets done.

      I have more than once expressed the opinion, to the staff here, that I’d like to see more op-ed pieces. But I would not dream of suggesting that they “ought to” do so just because I, or anyone else, would like them to spend more time doing that.

      Or, to put it succinctly: Their website, their rules.

      1. Mxs says:

        Not sure about you but I would welcome lower article count but those with higher content value/substance.

        This ones definitely a feel of informacial/bandwidth filler, too many sites are guilty of these days.

      2. sven says:

        Pushmi-Pullyu said:
        “If Tesla disappeared tomorrow, the EV revolution would continue. It would almost inevitably slow, but eventually some other “young turk” EV maker would rise to take its place.”

        You mean a “young turk” EV maker like Faraday Future? But you’re a big Faraday Future FUDster and hater. Would you change your tune if Tesla disappeared, and Faraday Future rose up and took Tesla’s place? Call me a cynic, but I just can’t picture you ending one of your posts with Go Faraday Future!

        Pushmi-Pullyu said:
        “I have more than once expressed the opinion, to the staff here, that I’d like to see more op-ed pieces.”

        Perhaps you should write some Op-ed pieces for InsideEVs. I could use a good laugh in the morning. 😀

        /s 😉

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          sven said:

          “But you’re a big Faraday Future FUDster and hater.”

          FUD, really?

          Quoting from Wikipedia’s article on “FUD”:

          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
          Fear, uncertainty and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a disinformation strategy used in sales, marketing, public relations, politics and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information and a manifestation of the appeal to fear.
          “FUD” means “Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.
          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

          Please cite even one single instance where I have posted anything qualifying as disinformation or propaganda in regards to Faraday Future.

          Unlike you, sven, I only post my honest opinions. You appear to be projecting your own behavior onto others. “FUD” is an accurate description of nearly all your posts to InsideEVs on the subject of Tesla. You have developed a very negative and disruptive habit — and reputation — of copying conspiracy theories and insinuations from Tesla bashers on other forums, and posting them here. There’s no valid or positive reason for you to do that.

          Your recent post delving into the financial intricacies of a Tesla Motors financial statement was quite revealing:

          http://insideevs.com/tesla-factory-tours-reveal-stunning-progress/#comment-811540

          I hope you won’t continue to deny that you have some sort of financial interest in Tesla — pretty obviously a negative one — because clearly you’ve spent a lot of time analyzing Tesla’s finances. It seems rather unlikely you’d do that unless you were an investor; apparently an investor in “shorts” or “puts”.

          sven continued:

          “Would you change your tune if Tesla disappeared, and Faraday Future rose up and took Tesla’s place?”

          I can’t see that happening in the real world, but certainly if FF starts selling a compelling plug-in EV — rather than being just a vaporware company showing lots of red flags which make it look like a scam — then I’ll be very happy to say “Go Faraday Future!” …just as on occasion I’ve posted “Go GM!” and “Go Nissan!” when I thought those companies deserved it; and even “Go VW!” at least once.

          It’s understandable, sven, that someone who routinely posts things he doesn’t honestly believe would try to rationalize his own sins by trying to convince himself that others typically do the same. But that’s you, dude, not me. You either need to admit to yourself that you’re a FUDster, or — far better — just quit doing it. Just because you’re short-selling TSLA doesn’t mean it’s acceptable, or even worth it, for you to post anti-Tesla FUD. Really, do you think you get much return on the investment of time you spend writing and posting all those anti-Tesla FUD attacks? Is it really worth it to get what is, to be wildly optimistic, a few cents improvement on the performance of your financial investment?

          I’ve seen honest two-way online discussion between “long” sellers and “short” sellers, so I know it’s possible to have a rational discussion of the subject. But even if you restricted yourself to honest posts on the subject, this isn’t a financial site; that discussion doesn’t belong here. Posting anti-Tesla FUD isn’t merely off-topic here, it’s disruptive and creates a negative atmosphere that causes others to leave. Just because other Tesla bashers engage in FUD here and elsewhere, sven, is no excuse for you to do the same.

          sven continued:

          “Perhaps you should write some Op-ed pieces for InsideEVs. I could use a good laugh in the morning.”

          On the subject of whether or not you actually laugh at my posts, my indifference is boundless. Personally, I rather doubt you’re laughing. One of the InsideEVs staff referred to a “feud” between you and me. Your out-of-the-blue personal attack on me here, in the midst of an otherwise pretty positive and interesting conversation, is certainly a good example of that.

          sven, I’ve had the pleasure of the author of an InsideEVs’ article send me an e-mail thanking me for my comments, and following up on them. How about you, dude? I’m guessing… not so much.

          1. Ambulator says:

            “http://insideevs.com/tesla-factory-tours-reveal-stunning-progress/#comment-811540

            I hope you won’t continue to deny that you have some sort of financial interest in Tesla — pretty obviously a negative one — because clearly you’ve spent a lot of time analyzing Tesla’s finances. It seems rather unlikely you’d do that unless you were an investor; apparently an investor in “shorts” or “puts”.”

            Sven might be short Tesla, on the other hand he may have had to file a corporate tax return somewhere, or even just had an accounting course in college. Sven is right about the capital accounts not being included in the profit and loss statements until they are depreciated. This is what make comments about spending on the Gigafactory hurting profits look stupid; they aren’t counted, except slowly after they go into production.

            About ten or fifteen years ago I had no idea how accounting worked. Then my boss gave me a spread sheet he had written and told be to implement it in our system. His spread sheet didn’t balance, but after going
            over the situation with his tax accountant I got it to; and implemented it. That was all done using cash accounting.

            Then I was told we had grown too large and had to move to accrual based accounting, which made everything worse. I got that working, but I did it in a non-standard way that every accountant hated. So I have a decent idea about what Sven is talking about even though I’ve never heard of a Section 179 expense and only vaguely know what a 10-K is.

            We really should have just used QuickBooks.

  18. Rick Bronson says:

    I own a Prius Hybrid-2007 and will keep driving until Tesla Model-3 hits the market and will probably buy it.

    If there are too many orders and cannot buy it, then I may go for Volt.

    Definitely Tesla has superior architecture with Dual motor and the batteries in the base.

    Yes Tesla has Supercharging stations which is not there with GM.

    Let’s accept guys, Tesla is far ahead of GM.

  19. wavelet says:

    What an idiotic survey… Pitting the not-yet-announced Model 3, so nothing is known about it, with the Bolt, full-announced but not yet tested or dricen, with the others which are all on-market models.

  20. Erwin says:

    Was there no European Car in the poll?

  21. sveno says:

    The thing that you americans do not understand there is that the survey was global! This takes the Bolt right of the game and in Europe that leaves us with Teslas and Leaf 2.

  22. sharkvolt says:

    My two cents:

    1. Musk himself has said the model 3 will be 20% smaller than the model S. That would put it in the same size as the Volt, in other words, cramped. It’s base model would basically be a stripped down 200 mile range Volt EV.

    2. The Bolt EV is already listed by experts as a larger than the Volt CUV/Suv EV, with more headroom and legroom than the Volt both front and rear.

    3. The Bolt is already in pre-production on the assembly line, and will be in driver’s hands this December, probably over a year before any next generation Leafs or model 3a will be available.

    What do you think the results of that same survey will be if taken in December?

    1. sveno says:

      Musk also said M3 is roughly the same size as an Audi A4 and I wouldn’t call that cramped in the front nor near. A4 is slightly larger than a C-class or 3 series!

      We’ll see in a few days for sure but I believe interior size will be same as Bolt (i.e. more room than Leaf).

      1. sveno says:

        Ok I lied about A4 being larger, it is wider but there is slightly less legroom in the back so interior is about the same. Seriously – those 3 are not tiny cars at least for us in Europe.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      sharkvolt:

      “Musk himself has said the model 3 will be 20% smaller than the model S. That would put it in the same size as the Volt, in other words, cramped.”

      “Cramped”? Well, Tesla has compared the Model ≡ to an Audi A4, and I do see the Wikipedia article on that car describes it as a compact.

      http://bgr.com/2016/02/29/tesla-model-3-size-audi-a4/

      But “compact” doesn’t necessarily mean cramped. The article linked here indicates the A4 has more passenger space than a BMW 3-series:

      https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/audi-a4-dimensions-0364

      So why don’t we wait until we have actual interior dimensions for the Model ≡, before we start talking through our hats and throwing around descriptors like “cramped” or “roomy”?

      1. Nathanael says:

        One of the downsides of Model S is that it does not fit in parking spaces marked “compact cars only”.

        Model 3 is a lot more practical for a lot of people for that reason. I expect it to just fit into the compact car class, like the Audi A4.

  23. martinwinlow says:

    I *really* hope and pray that Stumpf have got it *totally* wrong. That monstrosity at the top of the article is absolutely everything that defines the appalling taste of modern US car designers (… IMO!).

    It’s positively HIDEOUS! MW

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “Hideous” is the term which comes to my mind, too. Altho rather far down on the list of importance, one reason I’ll be glad when the Model ≡ Reveal actually occurs is that we’ll quit seeing these ridiculous amateur or semi-amateur renderings which — very obviously — had no input whatsoever from professional car designers.

  24. Bill Howland says:

    I have a basic question as to the ‘renderings’.

    I wasn’t aware that Tesla has officially said much of anything about the ‘3’ other than it will be smaller than the “S”.

    I know the price is supposedly an incredible value. But if the basic car is unknown, how can you make an evaluation?

    1. Dan Hue says:

      I’m with you, but apparently some people have a crystal ball.

  25. Steven says:

    Three years from now at GM HQ:

    People are buying the Bolt, but not at the rate we projected.

    Obviously, the average car buyer has no real interest in electric vehicles. Let’s cut our losses and discontinue it.

    1. Bill Howland says:

      That’s only if they make DeNyschen – the Cadillac head – the CEO of GM.

      I’m glad they didn’t hire this EV – hater any earlier. At least the 2014’s and a few 2016 ELR’s were made that will be around a while in the New and Used markets.

    2. Rick Bronson says:

      Steven

      Bolt will definitely sell, but Model-S will outsell it. Outsell by 2:1 or 3:1 is the question.

      As Bill mentioned, De Nyschen is not there at GM, so Bolt will continue. Besides its developed as dedicated EV and so GM will push hard to sell it. Just like with Volt.

      Whereas Cadillac ELR was just a Plugin version of the CTS Coupe. Hence they gave a lip service to it.

    3. Taser54 says:

      That’s silly. GM has covered both sides of the Bolt adoption by making it perfect for car-sharing use. Simply put, the car is perfect for corporate use and for personal use.

  26. Rick Bronson says:

    Since both Model-S & Model-X has motors in the axle, the bonnet is just used for holding our baggage.

    So theoretically the Model-3 don’t need the bonnet. They may cut it to reduce the weight and the cost. This way the entire space of the car can be used by the passengers and the cargo.

    Or it may have a short bonnet like a Van.

    1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      It would make sense for Tesla to give the Model ≡ a snub nose, like the BMW i3 and the Chevy Bolt, to maximize passenger space. In that case, there will be a minimal frunk, or none at all. But Tesla emphasizes the ability to use the long nose of the Models S and X as an extended crumple zone. So perhaps they’ll keep the long nose in the Model ≡.

      One thing I don’t expect to see is the high rear headroom of the Bolt. Tesla has said it was trying hard to reduce the coefficient of drag on the Model ≡, so it seems very likely that they’ll use a sloping rear roofline to improve streamlining. So unfortunately, I expect the Model ≡ will come in for criticism about rear seat headroom, just like the Model S.

      And of course I would be very pleased to be proven wrong on that point! 🙂

    2. Nathanael says:

      The bonnet is a crash-safety device: a crumple zone. It’ll probably shorter than the bonnet in the Model S, but it’ll still be there.

  27. Peter G. says:

    The top 2 finishers are cars we haven’t seen yet. Dreams usually win out over reality.

    Of the cars we have seen
    Model S 20% Chevy Volt 18%
    Ok the Model S outsells the Volt
    Didn’t need a survey to tell me that. Just look at the monthly sales chart.
    Model X 17.37% Bolt 17.27%
    Basically neck to neck

  28. DaveinOlyWA says:

    so are these the real T3 stats? I have to say that the range estimates are a bit “inflated”

  29. sharkvolt says:

    But, in 2017, Bolt EV will be the ONLY under $40,000, 200 mile range, white HOV stickered car available in California.

    How many California sales will be Volt or Prius Prime, when neither of them can get HOV stickers?

    1. sveno says:

      Are you sure that Leaf 2 won’t come out by then?