News
Tesla Cybertruck comes in dead last against GM, Ford and Rivian in consumer survey
A recent consumer survey comparing the Tesla Cybertruck to the Ford F-150 Electric, the Rivian R1T, and GM’s unreleased, unannounced electric pickup truck has rendered rather interesting results. Based on the results of the study, which was conducted by Autolist.com, it appears that consumers prefer EV trucks over incumbents like GM and Ford. Consumers specifically mentioned their preference for Rivian and Tesla vehicles. The Cybertruck, with its radical styling, ended up ranking dead last in the survey’s overall rankings.
Among the respondents of Autolist.com’s survey, 50% have never owned a pickup before, while 49% have owned or currently own a truck. One percent of the study’s respondents stated that they were “unsure.” Around ~1,100 respondents were selected for the study between late November and early December, with each one being asked which all-electric pickup they prefer and why.
Interestingly, GM’s unannounced, unconfirmed all-electric pickup was the respondents’ top choice, with the still-unknown vehicle grabbing 29% of the vote. The Ford F-150 Electric came in second with 27% of the vote, while the Rivian R1T came in at a respectable third place with 24%. At the bottom was the Tesla Cybertruck, which was deemed as the top EV pickup choice by 20% of respondents.
While the overall results of the consumer survey seem unfavorable to the Tesla Cybertruck, a look at the study’s detailed results shows something very notable about the upcoming vehicle. Respondents in the survey were asked to pick three reasons why they selected a particular all-electric truck. The reasons selected for the Cybertruck by the respondents were notably different compared to the other vehicles in the survey.
For GM’s unannounced electric pickup, 62% of respondents listed their trust in the GM brand as their reason behind their preference, while 41% listed the expected reliability of the upcoming vehicle. The expected performance of the truck was listed by 37% of respondents as a priority as well. These results mirror that of the Ford F-150 Electric, with respondents’ trust in the Ford brand receiving 54% of the votes, expected reliability getting 52%, and expected performance getting 38%.
These results are very different compared to those gathered for the Rivian R1T and Tesla Cybertruck. For the R1T, it appears that its exterior styling is its biggest draw, as shown by 75% of respondents listing its look as a reason why they would choose the vehicle. Expected vehicle size and performance both were listed by 35% of respondents, and expected practicality and features received 30% of the vote.
In this sense, the Cybertruck’s results are a league of their own, with respondents seemingly prioritizing the vehicle’s entire ecosystem and Tesla’s classic performance. Fifty percent of respondents listed the Cybertruck’s expected performance as a reason they would choose the vehicle, while expected efficiency and Autopilot received a nod from 44% of respondents. Tesla’s Supercharger Network was also listed by 29% of respondents. This, if any, shows that those who prefer the Cybertruck are already familiar with EV ownership, as evidenced by their mention of charging infrastructure and advanced driver-assist systems as key priorities.
In a way, these results show that buyers who are considering the Tesla Cybertruck have preferences that do not necessarily mirror that of usual pickup customers. A part of this discrepancy may be due to a notable difference among respondents who have owned a truck and those that have never owned a pickup before. Respondents who have owned pickups before seemed the most averse to the Cybertruck, with 35% choosing GM’s electric truck as their top choice, 28% choosing the F-150 Electric, 23% opting for the Rivian R1T, and only 14% selecting the Cybertruck. Among respondents who were non-truck owners, the results were flipped, with the Cybertruck being most popular with 25.8% of respondents’ vote, the Rivian R1T getting 24.8%, and the two EV trucks from Ford and GM receiving 24.7% each.
Chase Disher, an analyst at Autolist.com, explained that the results of its survey are actually favorable for all the electric pickups and their respective makers. It shows that the veteran automakers can find a loyal customer base for their all-electric trucks, and it also reveals that an entirely new pickup market could be opened, pushed by vehicles like the Cybertruck. “Frankly, these results are good for all four brands. It shows that Ford and GM can leverage their considerable — and existing — truck followings to boost interest in their EV models. Meanwhile, it shows that Tesla and Rivian could be poised to grab a meaningful share of a crucial new growth segment,” he said.
The full results of Autolist.com’s study could be accessed here.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
