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

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. 

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
-
-

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

SpaceX has solved Starship’s biggest challenge, Elon Musk says

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk has declared that SpaceX has effectively solved one of Starship’s most persistent engineering challenges: the reliability of its heat shield tiles.

During the company’s first-ever Earnings Call, the SpaceX CEO stated:

“I don’t want to jinx it or anything, but I think I would call the heat shield problem solved at this point. All indications from data and visual inspection is we have solved it. That doesn’t mean we won’t make improvements, but we do not see any technical obstacles to achieving rapid reusability at this point.”

Starship’s heat shield consists of roughly 18,000 hexagonal ceramic tiles covering the windward side of the upper stage. These tiles form the thermal protection system that shields the vehicle’s stainless-steel structure from the extreme heat of atmospheric reentry.

During descent, atmospheric friction generates temperatures exceeding several thousand degrees Celsius and creates plasma flows capable of melting unprotected metal. The tiles absorb, radiate, and insulate against this energy, allowing the vehicle to survive and potentially fly again. Without a durable heat shield, full and rapid reusability, the cornerstone of Starship’s design for frequent launches, satellite deployments, and deep-space missions, would remain impossible.

The tiles have long been a source of difficulty. On earlier test flights, a significant number of tiles detached during ascent due to vibration, aerodynamic loads, and imperfect attachment methods using pins and adhesives. Gaps between tiles allowed hot plasma to infiltrate, causing secondary damage and hot spots on the underlying structure.

These issues echoed challenges faced by NASA’s Space Shuttle, whose ceramic tiles required extensive, labor-intensive inspections and replacements between missions, preventing rapid turnaround. SpaceX has iteratively improved materials, standardized tile shapes, refined attachment techniques, added secondary ablative layers, and tested sealing methods such as “crunch wrap” felt to close gaps.

Progress was visible across Flights 10–12, with steadily better tile retention, yet questions remained about whether the system could support the minimal-refurbishment goal of rapid reuse.

Flight 13 on July 24 provided the decisive evidence. Ship 40 flew a deliberately more demanding profile with higher dynamic pressure to stress the heat shield beyond typical operational loads. It successfully deployed 20 operational Starlink V3 satellites, the first such payload on a Starship mission, performed an in-space Raptor engine relight, and executed a controlled reentry.

Elon Musk sheds two new bits of detail on Starship after 13th test launch

Cameras on six of the satellites and onboard sensors captured extensive imagery and data of the shield throughout the flight. The ship then achieved its softest splashdown to date in the Indian Ocean, remaining intact and floating rather than breaking apart or exploding as on prior missions. This allowed drone inspections and continuous telemetry of the heat shield in near-real time.

Post-flight analysis showed the majority of tiles remaining attached with only minor damage and limited plasma streaking at seams. Musk noted that the mission delivered “all the heat shield data we needed and then some.” Combined with visual inspections, these results underpinned his subsequent assessment that the core technical barriers to rapid reusability have been cleared. While refinements will continue, Flight 13 marked a pivotal step toward Starship’s operational future.

Continue Reading

News

SpaceX is coming for wireless giants with Starlink Mobile

Published

on

elon musk phone

SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell outlined ambitious plans for Starlink Mobile during the company’s August 4 Earnings call, signaling a direct challenge to U.S. wireless giants like AT&T, T-Mobile, and Verizon.

Shotwell noted that the three companies generate roughly $600 billion in combined annual revenue. “I anticipate us to be able to acquire quite a few of their customers because I think our service will be better,” she said. “We will eliminate dead zones leveraging the satellites in orbit. It will be better during any natural disaster… I’m quite excited about Starlink Mobile.”

SpaceX intends to combine its satellite constellation with terrestrial infrastructure. The company has acquired about 65 MHz of spectrum from EchoStar and plans to deploy next-generation Starlink Mobile satellites in 2027, with upgraded service targeted for the end of that year.

Shotwell described the enhanced network, leveraging more satellites and spectrum, as potentially “100 times better” than the current direct-to-cell offering, which already supports basic texting and app-based voice/video in coverage gaps through partnerships. She also indicated plans for low-cost cellular base stations that could integrate with existing Starlink dishes, creating a hybrid system for broader capacity in urban, suburban, and rural areas.

For the general public, Starlink Mobile promises significant advantages. Satellite connectivity can fill gaps where traditional cell towers fail, delivering service in remote locations, mountains, or during outages caused by storms, wildfires, or infrastructure damage—conditions in which ground networks often collapse.

Users could enjoy more consistent coverage without relying solely on dense tower builds, potentially at competitive prices as SpaceX scales. The hybrid approach aims to support full mobile services, including higher-speed data, while working with unmodified smartphones over time.

These developments revive long-standing but unfounded rumors of a Musk-developed “Tesla phone.” Speculative claims of a “Pi Phone” or similar device with built-in Starlink connectivity have circulated for years on social media, often featuring fabricated images and details. Elon Musk has repeatedly denied any such plans, stating Tesla has no intention of entering the smartphone market unless forced by extreme circumstances with app stores.

Tesla Phone rumors clarified by CEO Elon Musk

No official product, filings, or development announcements have ever materialized; the rumors remain hoaxes.

The announcement quickly pressured telecom stocks. Shares of AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile fell between roughly 2 and 4 percent in after-hours and premarket trading as investors weighed the competitive threat from a hybrid satellite-terrestrial network.

While execution challenges remain—spectrum deployment, infrastructure rollout, and regulatory hurdles—Shotwell’s remarks mark SpaceX’s clearest signal yet of entering the consumer mobile market as a full competitor.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

SpaceX shorts get warned by Musk ally, echoing Tesla’s early struggles

Published

on

SpaceX Starship V3 flight 12
SpaceX Starship V3 flight 12 (Credit: SpaceX)

Venture capitalist Chamath Palihapitiya has cautioned investors shorting SpaceX shares, drawing a direct parallel to the intense short-selling pressure Tesla faced in its early public years.

Responding to reports of elevated short interest in the newly public rocket, satellite, and AI company, Palihapitiya noted that similar dynamics played out with Tesla, where aggressive short sellers ultimately “went broke.”

SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) went public on June 12, 2026, in the largest IPO on record, pricing at $135 per share. Shares quickly surged to an all-time high of $225.64 just days later, briefly implying a valuation exceeding $2 trillion. The stock has since retreated sharply amid valuation concerns, lockup expiration fears, and broader market dynamics.

SpaceX and Nvidia team up on Musk’s orbital AI bet

By early August, it traded near $108–$125, representing a roughly 50 percent decline from the peak and bringing the market capitalization closer to the $1.5–1.7 trillion range. On August 4, shares closed up more than 9 percent at $125.33 ahead of earnings before facing pressure in after-hours and premarket trading.

Short interest has climbed dramatically. According to S3 Partners data widely cited in market reports, short positions reached approximately 219.3 million shares by late July, about 34 percent of the limited public float of roughly 640 million shares, and represented a notional value of around $24.6 billion.

Utilization of shares available to borrow hit 95 percent, with borrow fees rising. This level of shorting exceeded the dollar value of short bets against Tesla at the time and built rapidly ahead of two catalysts: the company’s first post-IPO earnings and an August 6 lockup expiration that could free up to 911.5 million additional shares.

CEO Elon Musk has issued warnings of his own. In mid-July, as short interest approached one-third of the float, he posted that “the survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low,” reiterating his view that the company could ultimately be worth more than Earth if it achieves its goals.

On August 4, just before earnings, Musk responded to the latest short-interest data by saying, “I try to warn them, but they just double down.”

SpaceX delivered its first quarterly results as a public company after the close on August 4. Second-quarter revenue rose 92 percent year-over-year to $7.8 billion, beating consensus estimates near $6.8–6.9 billion.

The net loss narrowed to $541 million, or 9 cents per share, better than the roughly 23–24 cent loss expected. Starlink/connectivity contributed about $4.3 billion (up 66 percent), while the AI business generated $2.6 billion (up roughly 250 percent). Capital expenditures were heavy at $18.4 billion, largely tied to AI infrastructure. Management projected a $100 billion annualized revenue run rate by year-end 2026 and outlined a path toward $1 trillion in annual revenue by 2030.

The combination of Chamath’s historical reminder, Musk’s repeated alerts, and the company’s ambitious growth targets underscores the high-stakes debate surrounding SPCX. Short sellers are positioned for near-term supply pressure from the lockup, while long-term bulls point to Starlink scale, Starship progress, and AI compute expansion as reasons the bears may ultimately face the same fate as many early Tesla skeptics.

Continue Reading