You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars

[easyrider]

I was looking at the study used in the demographic study and found an article stating that Tesla, not the Tesla drivers, are the deadliest car brand with a fatality rate of 5.6 accidents per billion vehicle miles traveled. The data used came from NHTSA and was compiled by iseecars to come to this conclusion. It only includes fatality data.

If you look at the Lending Tree study that uses drivers involved in accidents, which shows Tesla drivers at fault and not the Tesla, then look at the fatalities data knowing it isn't the Tesla but the driver, a person could argue that these fatalities are driver caused and not the brands cause.

Bill

Tesla named 'The Deadliest Car Brand in America', NHTSA data shows

Will you be surprised? Here’s a hint: It’s an American automaker.

www.usatoday.com

Tesla named 'The Deadliest Car Brand in America', NHTSA data shows​

iSeeCars speculates that the biggest contributor to the fatality rates at a brand level is driver behavior, rather than vehicle design or size. “A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving,”

 

[davidvel]

When you say "they" you are talking about the underwriters. The first actual person you would speak to is a licensed agent who gathers the information you give and then turns that information over to an underwriter that has access to your information.

How is the demographic study bogus ? So far the reason I think you are giving is because you say so.

I actually give merit to the demographic study as it provides the information to make a conclusion that the average Tesla buyer is a middle age white man that has be ability to drive 0-60 in 2 seconds while using FSD to drive distracted. This type of driver in a Tesla actually has the means to have an accident.

Dave, the only thing you've brought up that might be right is the type of quote. Other than that it's the same crap you always post.

Bill

I don't know what demographic study, or licensed agent, you are referring to. They used insurance quote requests with self-reported accident data submitted online by potential customers.

Bill, get a grip, and get some help, it will all turn out OK.

 

[HitchHiker71]

I actually give merit to the demographic study as it provides the information to make a conclusion that the average Tesla buyer is a middle age white man that has be ability to drive 0-60 in 2 seconds while using FSD to drive distracted. This type of driver in a Tesla actually has the means to have an accident.

Bill

Not to nitpick, but the only Tesla capable of a two second 60mph sprint is the Telsa Model S Plaid - which is a $100k+ limited production vehicle and by no means part of the large demographic that comprises the majority of Tesla buyers from your demographic study. The average Tesla is indeed quick, but you're referring to a limited edition model that was purpose built to be one of the fastest production vehicles in the world, not the mainstream Model Y/3 that the vast majority of people buy that are defined in the demographic post you referenced - and while the mainstream models are also pretty quick compared to most other comparable ICE model vehicles, typically under six seconds for the RWD models and in the mid-high second range for the dual motor models, that's a far cry from two seconds. Sure, there are the M3P and MYP models that are in the mid-low three second range, but again those don't sell well compared to the mainstream M3 and MY variants, which are the standard and premium models. Still pretty quick compared to most ICE vehicles, and yes you can get yourself into trouble pretty quickly if you're not careful.

 

[HitchHiker71]

I was looking at the study used in the demographic study and found an article stating that Tesla, not the Tesla drivers, are the deadliest car brand with a fatality rate of 5.6 accidents per billion vehicle miles traveled. The data used came from NHTSA and was compiled by iseecars to come to this conclusion. It only includes fatality data.

If you look at the Lending Tree study that uses drivers involved in accidents, which shows Tesla drivers at fault and not the Tesla, then look at the fatalities data knowing it isn't the Tesla but the driver, a person could argue that these fatalities are driver caused and not the brands cause.

Bill

Tesla named 'The Deadliest Car Brand in America', NHTSA data shows

Will you be surprised? Here’s a hint: It’s an American automaker.

www.usatoday.com

Tesla named 'The Deadliest Car Brand in America', NHTSA data shows​

iSeeCars speculates that the biggest contributor to the fatality rates at a brand level is driver behavior, rather than vehicle design or size. “A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving,”

Accurate according to Grok - with the documented caveats of course - the results appear to be primarily driven by human elements:

Q: Are the conclusions this article makes accurate? https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...d-deadliest-car-brand-in-america/76335529007/

A:

https://x.com/i/grok/share/2XDcA1TtRvWbZvv3zw1oUf3WG

The USA Today article (published November 24, 2024) accurately reports the findings of a study by iSeeCars, an automotive research firm. The study analyzed NHTSA's Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data for fatal crashes involving 2018–2022 model-year vehicles (from crashes occurring 2017–2022), normalized by estimated vehicle miles traveled using iSeeCars' proprietary data from over 8 million vehicles.Key conclusions from the article and study

• Tesla has the highest fatality rate among brands: 5.6 fatalities per billion vehicle miles traveled (just ahead of Kia at 5.5, with the overall average at 2.8).
• This does not mean Tesla vehicles are inherently unsafe — The article and iSeeCars explicitly attribute brand-level differences primarily to driver behavior (e.g., speeding, impairment, distraction) rather than vehicle design flaws.
• Teslas perform well in crash tests → Models like the Model Y have earned top safety ratings from organizations like the IIHS (e.g., 2024 Top Safety Pick+).
• Similar high rates for other "safe" vehicles — Many models with strong safety features (e.g., Honda CR-V Hybrid) also ranked high, reinforcing that human factors dominate.

Accuracy assessment

• The data and ranking are factual — Based on the iSeeCars analysis of public NHTSA fatal crash records. Multiple outlets (e.g., Road & Track, MotorTrend, Snopes) confirmed the same numbers and methodology without disputing the raw results.
• The headline is sensationalized — Phrases like "Deadliest Car Brand in America" can imply the vehicles themselves are dangerous, but the article's body clarifies this is about real-world fatal crash involvement per mile, heavily influenced by how/where drivers use them (e.g., Teslas' quick acceleration may encourage riskier driving; high-mileage urban use could play a role).
• Limitations of the study (noted in the article and by critics):
  • Relies on iSeeCars' non-public estimates for miles traveled, which some (including Tesla executives and forums like Reddit/Tesla Motors Club) question for potential inaccuracies.
  • Focuses only on fatal crashes (not overall accidents or injuries).
  • Does not account for factors like driver demographics, road types, or Autopilot usage in most cases.
  • Tesla's own safety reports claim lower crash rates when Autopilot is engaged compared to national averages, though these are self-reported and cover all crashes (not just fatalities).

In summary, the article's core conclusions align with the iSeeCars study and are supported by the evidence, but the presentation emphasizes the dramatic ranking without fully countering potential misinterpretations that blame the cars rather than drivers. This is a common pattern in coverage of the study—no major fact-checks or sources have debunked the underlying data.

 

[easyrider]

I don't know what demographic study, or licensed agent, you are referring to. They used insurance quote requests with self-reported accident data submitted online by potential customers.

Bill, get a grip, and get some help, it will all turn out OK.

Of course you don't have a clue. No surprise here.

Bill

 

[easyrider]

Not to nitpick, but the only Tesla capable of a two second 60mph sprint is the Telsa Model S Plaid

I wonder if the middle aged guy described in the demographic study drives a higher cost or lower cost Tesla. Either way, all Tesla models are fast. We test drove a model y and when either of us punched it, we could definitely feel it. What was cool is that when punching it hard the Tesla was very stable. I would compare it to driving 90 in our Lincoln where it feels like driving 50. Very stable.

Bill

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

100 pages on electric vs. ICE cars. . .

 

[easyrider]

100 pages on electric vs. ICE cars. . .

I'm thinking the conversation is heading the other way a bit as the emission standards have been normalized to where the auto makers can build a regular car or truck again. The interesting to me thing about the emission standard legislation is vehicles like the Toyota Hylux and Suzuki Jinmy could be legal in the USA again. I'm sure there are other issues for vehicles like these to overcome besides emissions but emissions are a biggie.

Bill

 

[Brett]

EV Sales SKYROCKET 48% Worldwide in Q3 2025​

 

[Brett]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/11/business/ford-electric-vehicles-china.html

 

[HitchHiker71]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[easyrider]

View attachment 119246


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Seems like a Bret post, lol. Something about the post is wrong. I think you already know but I'm going to just say it. In October 2025, In October 2025, Toyota sold 207,910 vehicles, Ford sold about 175,000 vehicles, GM sold about 150,000 vehicles and Hyundai & Kia sold about 146,000 vehicles. U.S.A sales did slow in all categories, probably because of no incentives to buy other than pricing.

Tesla did have a decent amount of registrations in October. It's only because they were filling orders made in September while the incentives were in play.

Bill

 

[davidvel]

Seems like a Bret post, lol. Something about the post is wrong. I think you already know but I'm going to just say it. In October 2025, In October 2025, Toyota sold 207,910 vehicles, Ford sold about 175,000 vehicles, GM sold about 150,000 vehicles and Hyundai & Kia sold about 146,000 vehicles. U.S.A sales did slow in all categories, probably because of no incentives to buy other than pricing.

Tesla did have a decent amount of registrations in October. It's only because they were filling orders made in September while the incentives were in play.

Bill

Cite source?

 

[youppi]

Seems like a Bret post, lol. Something about the post is wrong. I think you already know but I'm going to just say it. In October 2025, In October 2025, Toyota sold 207,910 vehicles, Ford sold about 175,000 vehicles, GM sold about 150,000 vehicles and Hyundai & Kia sold about 146,000 vehicles. U.S.A sales did slow in all categories, probably because of no incentives to buy other than pricing.

Tesla did have a decent amount of registrations in October. It's only because they were filling orders made in September while the incentives were in play.

Bill

Yes Toyota Motor North America sold 207,910 vehicles in October in USA as per Google Gemini but it includes all type of engine (gas, hybrid, EV, ...) and also both sale of Toyota brand (178,240) and Lexus brand (29,670).
The table posted by @HitchHiker71 was EV registration only.

 

[easyrider]

Yes Toyota Motor North America sold 207,910 vehicles in October in USA as per Google Gemini but it includes all type of engine (gas, hybrid, EV, ...) and also both sale of Toyota brand (178,240) and Lexus brand (29,670).
The table posted by @HitchHiker71 was EV registration only.

While it may seem like good news for Tesla by using registration numbers only for October, when compared to the total overall new auto sales in October, the number of Tesla registered is less than the number of Tesla's sold because Tesla was filling orders made while the incentives were available. It might be interesting to see Tesla actual sales for September in contrast to October. I bet October sales were way off and November even worse.

That being said, if I was going to buy an EV it would only be a Tesla. After a couple of years old, these historically depreciate up to 40% - 50% . Now with no incentives for a used Tesla , the high depreciation in the first few years will likely be higher.

Bill

 

[davidvel]

Yes Toyota Motor North America sold 207,910 vehicles in October in USA as per Google Gemini but it includes all type of engine (gas, hybrid, EV, ...) and also both sale of Toyota brand (178,240) and Lexus brand (29,670).
The table posted by @HitchHiker71 was EV registration only.

Yes, right on cue more fake news facts from Bill. Accuracy and comprehension are not high there.

 

[easyrider]

Yes, right on cue more fake news facts from Bill. Accuracy and comprehension are not high there.

Dave, you seem to have a bad case of BDS. In pretty much every post that you reply to me you think you are leaving an insult , which you are, but you are also leaving information about your self. In the real world, a person that exhibits this type of behavior is often a person of low character, poor judgement, deep insecurity or low self esteem.

Bill

 

[davidvel]

Dave, you seem to have a bad case of BDS. In pretty much every post that you reply to me you think you are leaving an insult , which you are, but you are also leaving information about your self. In the real world, a person that exhibits this type of behavior is often a person of low character, poor judgement, deep insecurity or low self esteem.

Bill

Nope, I suffer from OAFS=Opinion as Fact Syndrome. Given that you are one of the most prolific posters of your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs posited as facts, yes, you get many replies from me. As I have posted many times, I am not insulting you, and in fact I feel really sorry that you think your opinions and thoughts equal reality and facts. I hope you are not losing your faculties. When you respond you either ignore my showing you were wrong, or acknowledge you made it up, and inject an ad hominem attack.

If a person that tells others that your posts are not factual, but made up fantasyland theories, is an exhibition of low character, poor judgement, deep insecurity or low self esteem in your world, then enjoy your world. I am certainly none of those things, more likely more the opposite of those traits, which may or may not be better.

 

[easyrider]

Nope, I suffer from OAFS=Opinion as Fact Syndrome. Given that you are one of the most prolific posters of your thoughts, opinions, and beliefs posited as facts, yes, you get many replies from me. As I have posted many times, I am not insulting you, and in fact I feel really sorry that you think your opinions and thoughts equal reality and facts. I hope you are not losing your faculties. When you respond you either ignore my showing you were wrong, or acknowledge you made it up, and inject an ad hominem attack.

If a person that tells others that your posts are not factual, but made up fantasyland theories, is an exhibition of low character, poor judgement, deep insecurity or low self esteem in your world, then enjoy your world. I am certainly none of those things, more likely more the opposite of those traits, which may or may not be better.

Like I said earlier up thread, you have BDS (Bill Derangement Syndrome) lol. At any rate, I guess I should thank you for noticing.

Bill

 

[easyrider]

Ford's EV stratagy ended up costing the company billions. It looks like they are out of the EV game for now.

Bill

Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Shares of Ford in New York have yet to hit a new high since the debut of the all-electric F-150 Lightning in April 2022. What was pitched as a flagship EV push has since devolved into an epic miscalculation, with the automaker now preparing to take $19.5 billion in charges, mostly in the fourth quarter, as it unwinds and overhauls its electric vehicle strategy.

Ford is overhauling its entire electrification roadmap. The reset includes the cancellation of three future EV programs, the termination of the current F-150 Lightning, and a shift toward new offerings across multiple powertrains, including a future extended-range hybrid vehicle variant of the F-Series.

 

[easyrider]

Cite source?

Much of my search engine searches end in one click with the use of AI. Basically, I can ask any questions and get an immediate response from AI. In the responses, there are often articles and videos that view. Other sources for me are the many podcasts I watch. I find regular TV programming , especially news and news shows, really lacking in many ways. Here is one of the you tube subscriptions that I do like enough to watch. This is Sabine Hossenfelder explaining how AI might replace search engines.

Bill

 

[Ken555]

While Ford may have screwed up, Nissan and others keep going.

https://www.tomsguide.com/vehicle-tech/evs/2026-nissan-leaf-pros-and-cons

 

[HitchHiker71]

Ford's EV stratagy ended up costing the company billions. It looks like they are out of the EV game for now.

Bill

Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries | ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

Shares of Ford in New York have yet to hit a new high since the debut of the all-electric F-150 Lightning in April 2022. What was pitched as a flagship EV push has since devolved into an epic miscalculation, with the automaker now preparing to take $19.5 billion in charges, mostly in the fourth quarter, as it unwinds and overhauls its electric vehicle strategy.

Ford is overhauling its entire electrification roadmap. The reset includes the cancellation of three future EV programs, the termination of the current F-150 Lightning, and a shift toward new offerings across multiple powertrains, including a future extended-range hybrid vehicle variant of the F-Series.

Turns out building SDVs profitably isn't nearly as easy as everyone predicted (though those of us who actually know something about this topic have been saying this all along of course). I LOL'd at all of the articles over the past few years saying how GM would take over the BEV space within a few years. How long until GM makes the same move Ford just did?

The Tesla moat indeed remains strong, again, as those of us who follow this segment closely have been saying all along. The legacy manufacturers cannot do it, at least here in the US, they gave it the old college try using the same tired old supplier based approaches for vehicle assembly, spending tens of billions in the process, only to come to the same inevitable conclusion that I've been saying on here for years now - they won't be able to do it using the same tired old engineering processes used for the past 50+ years. Building electrified vehicles using a core ICE design simply doesn't work. What Ford just announced is living proof of this fact.

IMHO the long-term impacts of these decisions will eventually result in the demise of legacy big auto here in the US, and no I'm not exaggerating, at least in their current form as those who build ever better BEVs continue to eat away at legacy auto market share. It won't happen tomorrow, but five years out from today, let's check back in and see where things stand - think back five years ago and see just how different things were in 2020 as but one real world example. Tesla is pushing ahead faster than ever now, with FSD Unsupervised in testing in Austin as we speak (several robotaxis are actively on the roads now with no safety monitor in the vehicle). Driverless vehicles are on the horizon, and the world will never be the same, not if but when they take hold. Those who argue that legacy autos can do the same thing, nope, they cannot, because of their lack of vertical integration that prevents all systems within the vehicle being homogenized and all controlled via one centralized computer via CPU/software - hence the term SDV. Ford gave up. Is GM next? Only time will tell.

 

[emeryjre]

While Ford may have screwed up, Nissan and others keep going.

https://www.tomsguide.com/vehicle-tech/evs/2026-nissan-leaf-pros-and-cons

The EV market needs a low-priced model with limited "luxury" features

The "entry" car market for first time buyers is very limited

 

[easyrider]

While Ford may have screwed up, Nissan and others keep going.

https://www.tomsguide.com/vehicle-tech/evs/2026-nissan-leaf-pros-and-cons

Those newer Nisan Leaf ev's might be a pretty good EV since they tweaked the battery cooling system. The older Leaf's had a pretty low range but in the PNW we can still pick one up for under $10,000 with a rebuilt battery.

Bill