Connect with us

News

Ford study reveals 4 out of 10 Americans believe EVs are powered by gasoline

A Ford F-150 EV prototype. (Credit: Ford Motor Company)

Published

7 years ago

on

A study conducted by Ford has revealed that car buyers still have much to learn about the nature and advantages of all-electric cars. Based on the results of Ford’s study, there is still a lot of misinformation surrounding EVs as a whole. This is prominent in the US, where 42% of Americans stated that they believe electric cars still need to be filled up with gasoline to run. 

The rather disconcerting results of the study, which involved respondents from the United States, Europe, and China, were shared on Medium by Ford Motor Company Global Director for Electrification Ted Cannis. According to the executive, there remains a gap between “what an electric vehicle can do and what customers believe they can do” among car buyers. This gap covers several areas, from the performance of EVs to the vehicles’ general ownership experience. 

More than 90% of individuals polled by Ford, for one, stated that they don’t believe quick acceleration and a great driving experience is a benefit of electric cars. This is unfortunate, considering that premium electric cars such as the Porsche Taycan are quite literally built to be driven hard for extended periods of time, while vehicles like the Model 3 Performance routinely crush driver’s cars such as the BMW M3 on the track. 

Around 67% of Americans and 68% of Europeans also believe that EVs are not capable for towing and hauling tasks. These findings are noteworthy for Ford, considering that the company previously demoed its F-150 EV prototype towing over 1 million pounds of cargo. Furthermore, almost 80% of Americans stated that they would not pick an EV because of extreme weather. Nearly 65% who are in the market for an AWD vehicle will not consider an electric car as well. 

Advertisement

Yet, perhaps the starkest reminder of the information gap between mainstream car buyers and EVs lie in the fact that 42% of Americans among Ford’s respondents believe that electric cars are still powered by gasoline. There could be several reasons behind this misconception, one of which could be due to hybrids and plug-in hybrids, cars that are still equipped with an internal combustion engine, being dubbed as “electrified” vehicles.  

Cannis stated that another possible reason for this misconception lies in the habits of consumers, as even owners of hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles still take regular trips to the gas station. Thus, the concept of “filling up” a car at home by plugging it in like a regular electronic device could seem unnatural to some consumers. The Ford executive added that this misconception is unfortunate, since surveys of all-electric car owners have revealed that 80% of an EV’s charging is done at home and at the workplace. 

The Ford executive’s statements about the misconceptions surrounding electric vehicles are accurate. Tesla, despite producing electric vehicles for over a decade, deals with such misinformation consistently, as the company and its vehicles are still frequently misunderstood. The Tesla Model S Performance and the Model 3 Performance are very quick sedans, for example, but it won’t be difficult to find a driver who believes that the vehicles are just slow, “glorified golf carts.” Overall, Ford’s efforts at understanding the market’s pulse about EVs is admirable, and the findings of the study will hopefully guide the company in its strategy to roll out battery-electric vehicles like the F-150 EV in the near future.

Advertisement
Related Topics:

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk sheds details on Tesla FSD’s upcoming improvements

Published

4 minutes ago

on

July 20, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk shed more details on the upcoming improvements to Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite, specifically one that the CEO mentioned last week, which should help owners see fewer interventions.

Last week, Musk hinted that one major improvement that Tesla planned to roll out to Full Self-Driving users was the car’s ability “to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences.”

Elon Musk says your Tesla will start to learn your individual preferences

This small bit of detail was linked to a post from Tesla community member Whole Mars, who said that FSD’s tendency to exit the carpool lane, a feature that owners can turn on but at times the car will disregard.

It sounds like, based on Musk’s two responses since that original post, it is safe to say the things FSD will start to remember are wide-ranging. However, it seems the biggest differences will be noticed with parking performance, which Musk continues to mention.

Highway Lane Preferences

The initial post Musk mentioned, with these new remembered preferences soon to arrive for Tesla owners everywhere, was the Carpool/Express Lane.

Tesla has a setting in the FSD menu that lets drivers enable HOV Lane travel. However, the car won’t always stay in that suggested or preferred lane.

Some owners have also complained of left lane camping, an illegal maneuver in at least some states. Cruising in the passing lane has resulted in tickets for some, as it is illegal in over 30 states in the U.S.

Tesla did not confirm if these preferences would also be included in new FSD behaviors, but it would certainly help move the company toward fewer interventions.

Parking Preferences

This seems to be the real focus of the entire operation, as Musk stated several weeks ago that parking was overwhelmingly the most frequent reason for interventions.

The major issue with parking is not necessarily the parking “performance,” as FSD is generally good at parking. It definitely has its issues; we’ve recorded plenty of them, including this one as recent as last week:

However, the changes coming are more about preferences, meaning where you park and how your car enters the spot, either pulling in or backing in. Owners have also reported that pulling into the correct driveway is a relatively rare thing for FSD, something else that needs to be confronted.

Musk basically confirmed that all of these things would be part of Tesla’s plan to address driver preferences with FSD:

It’s obvious there is something big coming with FSD, and the company’s focus seems to be eliminating any intervention that would be related to preferences. This is probably the biggest bottleneck between Tesla and being fully autonomous. Critical interventions do occur, but they are much less frequent.

The only time a driver should be taking over is because of a critical intervention; this seems to be the goal of Tesla right now.

This all seems to be a priority as Tesla continues to move closer to the prospect of unsupervised driving.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk says your Tesla will start to learn your individual preferences

Published

2 days ago

on

July 18, 2026

By

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk said today on X that Teslas will start to learn your individual preferences. This is something that he seemed to hint toward earlier this month when he said parking was by far the biggest reason drivers intervene with Full Self-Driving.

Musk made the comment in response to notable Tesla influencer Whole Mars, who said that his vehicle will sometimes disobey the settings he has enabled for his car. He responded to the post, stating that “The car will start to remember your specific interventions and match each person’s individual preferences.”

This is something that could be perhaps one of the biggest ways Tesla could minimize or even work closer toward eliminating interventions altogether. While FSD does a lot of things really well, many people intervene a vast majority of the time not due to major or critical safety errors.

Instead, many take over because the car is doing something that they do not like as a preference; it might park in a parking spot that is not preferred by the driver, it might linger too long in the left lane on the highway (a personal favorite), or it could even take a route that the driver does not like.

These all lead to interventions, but they are not triggered by a major safety issue. Instead, it’s just preference.

READ OUR REVIEW OF TESLA’S LATEST FSD VERSION:

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.5 Early Impressions: new features and early performance

If Teslas could start to learn the personal preferences of the person who owns them, interventions will truly begin to be less frequent. Some of this is already pretty evident, in my opinion. Teslas use a neural network to learn behaviors and accumulate data to improve performance.

For months now, we’ve tracked FSD’s performance at “Except Right Turn” stop signs, something that is very common in Pennsylvania, but many of our readers located in other parts of the U.S. have never heard of. FSD handles one Except Right Turn stop sign very well, one that I travel past frequently. Others that I do not navigate through as often do not have as confident a performance. It seems like the cars might already be doing this to an extent.

That example is also for something that is a street sign and not necessarily a driver preference; however, I still feel it is worth mentioning because it only handles that commonly passed Except Right Turn stop sign with true confidence. Others it still seems to struggle with.

This could be one of Tesla’s big moves toward full autonomy, and it could be a pathway to truly unsupervised driving. Every day, millions of cars on the road travel at a human driver’s personal preferences with no incident. Why can’t autonomous vehicles still cater to a passenger’s preferences while being autonomous? Tesla seems to have the idea that it would be possible.

Continue Reading

News

Ron DeSantis calls out media bias in Tesla crash coverage

Published

2 days ago

on

July 18, 2026

By

Credit: ABC News

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has sharply criticized legacy media outlets for what he describes as selective and biased reporting on vehicle accidents involving Tesla. In a recent X post, DeSantis questioned why headlines routinely spotlight the Tesla brand in crash stories, even when human error is the clear cause, while similar incidents with other automakers often receive generic treatment.

A prime example is the June 19, 2026, fatal crash in Katy, Texas. A Tesla Model 3 driven by Michael Butler struck a brick home at high speed, killing 76-year-old Martha Avila inside. Initial reports and headlines prominently featured “Tesla crash” and referenced the driver’s claim that an automated driving-assistance system was engaged.

Many outlets quickly speculated that Full Self-Driving or Autopilot were the cause of the crash, immediately blaming the suites for the accident shortly after it happened.

However, Tesla responded shortly after the accident with vehicle data that showed Butler manually overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100 percent, reaching 73 MPH in a residential area, more than double the speed limit. The accelerator remained floored after impact.

Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) later confirmed these findings, and Butler now faces manslaughter charges. His phone searches also included queries like “Tesla FSD too timid,” suggesting he may have intervened aggressively. Despite this, many headlines continued to center Tesla’s technology rather than the driver’s actions.

DeSantis highlighted a Washington Post headline, which was labeled, “Newly released photo shows wreckage of Tesla crash that killed grandmother.”

The subheadline noted the driver overrode assistance and floored the accelerator, yet the brand name dominated the framing. He asked whether legacy outlets typically name the make of a car in routine crashes or reserve that treatment for Tesla to push a narrative.

This pattern appears widespread. Crashes involving Ford, Chevrolet, or Toyota vehicles frequently appear as “pickup truck slams into home” or “fatal car crash kills pedestrian” without brand specifics, especially absent new technology angles.

High-profile Ford F-150 or Chevy Silverado incidents tied to large sales volumes often escape brand-callout scrutiny. In contrast, Tesla stories consistently lead with the manufacturer, amplifying perceptions of risk despite data showing strong overall safety performance:

Tesla’s own 2025 Impact Report indicates vehicles using FSD logged 0.19 major incidents per million miles, roughly eight times fewer than the U.S. average. Models like the Model Y also rank among the safest in IIHS and NHTSA testing for occupant protection. Critics argue disproportionate coverage ignores these statistics and driver behavior factors, such as younger or more aggressive Tesla owners in some studies.

DeSantis frames this as part of a broader political agenda against innovative American companies like Tesla. By consistently naming Tesla while downplaying others, media outlets risk eroding public trust and shaping perceptions detached from the evidence of human error in most cases.

As autonomous technology evolves across the industry, consistent and factual reporting will be essential to separate real safety concerns from narrative-driven coverage.

Continue Reading