AD #2237 – Tesla Unveils Massive Pickup, Mercedes Teases New CLS, Magna’s Active Aero for Trucks

November 20th, 2017 at 11:25am

Runtime: 7:26

0:33 VW Is a Financial Fortress
1:18 Tesla Unveils Massive Pickup
1:55 New Supercar from Scuderia Cameron Glickenhaus
3:12 Magna’s Active Aero for Trucks
4:13 Shell Tests Biodiesel Made from Coffee Grounds
4:49 Mercedes Teases New CLS
5:34 Hyundai Wants a Pickup for Women

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone , Dow Automotive Systems , Lear Corporation and Hyundai.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

31 Comments to “AD #2237 – Tesla Unveils Massive Pickup, Mercedes Teases New CLS, Magna’s Active Aero for Trucks”

  1. Lambo2015 Says:

    Guess Tesla is going after a truck market that doesn’t exist so that they are not faced with another vehicle they cant produce in large volume.

  2. G.A.Branigan Says:

    LMAO at tesla…..again. They have to be smoking some really potent stuff. Or maybe it’s their investors?

  3. Bradley Says:

    I don’t care if its painted pink. A compact and maneuverable truck would get me in the showroom.

    A pink compact truck would be a my first Hyundai.

    Seriously…do you really think only woman care about those characteristics in a truck???

  4. Bradley Says:

    my “a” hit the wrong sentence…

    should be:

    A pink compact truck would my first Hyundai.

    Seriously…do you really think only a woman cares about those characteristics in a truck???

  5. buzzerd Says:

    @4 I think his point is that women are more intimidated by the bulk where as men aren’t as much. I would also think that women are generally using their trucks for different things. Again – generally- women probably aren’t hauling wood, dirt, motorcycles… I would think it’s more light duty things SUP’s, furniture, bicycles, dead animals – if they are into hunting. Most of the time though both parties are simply hauling people.

  6. Kit Gerhart Says:

    I see quite a few women driving macho Ram, etc. pickup trucks, nearly always empty, like most pickup trucks.

    As Bradley says, there is a market for smaller pickups, and it’s not particularly sex dependent. I like the looks of that Hyundai. I suppose if they actually build it, it will have an 18 inch stretch and more doors, though, complmetely ruining its appearance (imho).

  7. buzzerd Says:

    the problem with small trucks has been the economics of it, 3/4 of the $$$$$ for 1/2 the bang. If they can figure that out they have a chance of selling a bunch.

  8. Chuck Grenci Says:

    Tesla is like a magician (but maybe my interpretation might not be what some may be thinking); the art of mis-direction is the magician’s trick and I think we are continuing to see this from Musk/Tesla.

    As long as the process to change coffee grinds to bio-fuel is simple and doesn’t use much energy, fine; but if the process uses too much energy, there really isn’t much gain or is there too much harm from the disposition of coffee grounds (they are biodegradable and actually would complement the soil they were buried in).

    There have been vehicles throughout the years that might be said have been aimed specifically at women, but Hyundai’s answer may be to a question nobody has asked. They should make their entry smaller than the mid-sized (of today) and make it gender neutral. I think there is a niche for that sized smaller pickup.

  9. Don LaCombe Says:

    Ingress/Egress is probably more of an issue than visibility in trucks. I do think that Hyundai is bringing back an old concept (Ranchero etc) that I would personally be interested in.

  10. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Hyundai would be an ideal company to make an actual small pickup, because unlike the “Detroit 3, Toyota, and Nissan, they would be competing with “the other guys,” and not with their own higher profit bigger trucks. A Hyundai small pickup would take a few sales from their own cars and CUV’s, but a lot more from other manufacturers already making pickups.

  11. Dave Thompson Says:

    Tesla truck chassis good foundation for an RV with electricity to spare while out and about and able to charge while camping in a RV park

  12. Alan Says:

    Just bought a new Chevy Silverado 1500 last month. Have owned many Ford and Chevy trucks. The best driving and riding were a Chevy Avalanche followed by a Ford Sports Trac. If Hyundai made a quality truck that had a car like ride like an expensive car and easy in & out of the seats – I would consider buying it, if the price was reasonable and the quality and towing power was there.

  13. Lambo2015 Says:

    Not sure why the big 3 don’t bring back an actual small pick-up. The S-10 from 83 to 93 averaged 214k sales each year with another 136k S-10 Blazers. This doesn’t even account for Ford Rangers. Typical though they grew in size with each update until they were basically mid-size trucks. If they offered a truck that was as small as the original S-10 and Ranger and didn’t cost 30k it would easily sell over 200k units a year.

  14. RickW Says:

    I’ve been waiting for someone to build a True small pick-up truck. I miss my Mazda/Ranger pickup truck from 1999.

    I’ve been looking for a good 2000 to 2003 4WD Ranger only to find that when they come up for sale the sellers are always asking for prices that are way over book prices. And they don’t stay for sale long. People are eager to get one in nice condition.

    If Hyundai makes one about the same size as the one I had, I’ll be buying one for sure.

    One thing that hasn’t been mentioned about these smaller pick up’s is that they easily fit in a single car garage as opposed to the monster size Full Size pickups being sold today. Even the mid-size pickups are bigger than I need.

  15. Lambo2015 Says:

    #11 Dave I thought the same thing. The Tesla truck is large enough to be offered in a few configurations. Box truck for like UPS, RV, small tanker or maybe even tow truck.

  16. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Today’s “mid-size” pickups are LONG, the shortest versions of Colorado and Tacoma are about 212 inches long, the same as a Crown Vic/Grand Marquis.

  17. Kit Gerhart Says:

    #13 Wouldn’t most of those 200K sales come at the expense of sales of more expensive monster pickups? I could be wrong, but I figure that is why GM and Ford don’t want to build basic small pickups, that could be sold for under 20K.

  18. Lambo2015 Says:

    #17 I’m sure that’s a concern but honestly I would think the currently offered mid-sized trucks compete more closely with the full size than a small truck would. I could see a small pick up competing more with the small SUV and CUV market. The nice thing is the original S-10 from 1982-3 came with a 82 HP 4cyl. They could offer it with a nice 200HP 4cyl today.

  19. Lambo2015 Says:

    One more comment on the Tesla trucks. Obviously Elon has never driven a large truck or he would realize his center seated design requires the driver to now peek out half the truck width to see around another semi on a two lane highway. That would be scary coming the other way.

  20. JWH Says:

    Re: Mid-sized pickup trucks – When the Colorado/Canyon hit the market, I read that these were essentially within an inch (2.54 cm) of the 1967 Chevrolet C10 pickup. We won’t comment on the size of the current full size pickups that as many have pointed out do a nice job of hauling one person 90+% of the time. Many years ago when I was at Chevrolet Engineering, whenever we studied small pickups, it seemed the direction gravitated to using current components such as brakes, driveline, etc. from full size truck at the time. Big surprise that the “small” truck weighted very close to the “full size”.

  21. Kit Gerhart Says:

    18 I had a second generation S-10 with the 2.2 four cylinder, and a 5-speed manual. It had about 120 hp. It drove pretty well. I bought it to learn the appeal of pickup trucks, since so many people had them, but quickly found that pickup trucks make no sense for me. I rarely haul dirty stuff that I don’t mind having stolen, which is what pickups are good for. Wagons, vans, and hatchbacks work much better for me.

    I still see quite a few second generation S-10′s on the road, especially in Kokomo, IN, where a lot of them were sold. I rarely see the first generation; the road salt has destroyed nearly all of them.

  22. Brett Cammack Says:

    I still want one of those RAM 600 pickups they sell south of the border. 2-door, regular cab, please.

  23. Kit Gerhart Says:

    If the Ram 700 makes it to the U.S., they have a good legacy name to use, Rampage.

  24. Kevin Anderson Says:

    Dacia makes many small pickup models. They are corporately related to Nissan, why can’t Nissan re-introduce a Dacia as the new ‘Datsun’ pickup??

  25. Ziggy Says:

    I always thought the percentage difference in full size pickup truck sales between men and women was due to the large pickup truck being an extension of the male appendage and since women don’t have one they don’t need a large pickup truck nearly as much as the men. Maybe I’m wrong, I’m sure someone will tell me if I am …..

  26. Drew Says:

    Quick, will someone please repossess Bruce Jenner’s pickup?

  27. GaryPaul Says:

    This is a LONG response so I am warning you do not read if you want only a 3 sentence reply. First if any man buys a pickup truck because he wants to show that he is so big and strong then he actually isn’t the man that he thinks he is—Whatever happened to the men who wanted a small pickup because of its functional attributes for the independent guy who wants to do things himself when he can, and loves the functional aspects of a truck? (higher ground clearance (equal to or greater than 8 inches), an acceptable minimal tow rating (3000 lbs), a long bed option (at least 7 feet), a reasonable bed side height so he can reach in & grab things out of the bed easily (unlike today’s pickups where manufacturers offer swing out steps to reach onto the bed!), a 4 cylinder reasonably powerful normally aspirated gas engine because it is cheaper to buy, and offers good mpg, etc… It seems that to a large degree he has disappeared because of the new emphasis on men who can’t do anything to take care of their home or plant a tree or change or the manual trans fluid on their vehicle

    ….I have written about the appeals of a true compact pickup truck time and again at various sites including this one in the past. First a few points:

    Yes there is some demand for a compact pickup truck for small businesses, homeowners, and anyone who wants the capability of a pickup with the exterior bed combined with reasonable size, price and comfort. I recall at the time of the truly compact pickups like the old 1980s & 1990s Ford rangers and Chevy/GMC S10-S15 that GM and Ford did not like them because they could not charge enough for the vehicle to make much profit. It seems that today there is a Gentleman’s Agreement between the manufacturer’s to NOT get into that market again since the profits are so small. Thus, a hungry automaker could produce such a vehicle if they wanted to make some progress against any of the other makers who refuse to compete in this area at this time. Since today’s “compact” pickups are indeed close to the size of full size pickups from 20 odd years ago it is true that there is indeed room for a smaller truck. And as long as it is rugged enough and functions like a pickup should it is not mandatory that it have a separate body on frame or even a separate bed as traditional pickups have had for decades (recall the Ford pickups in the early 1960s with solid side sheet metal (non-separate beds) from the front to back that were generally considered a failure because of the body crinkling when heavy weight was added to the bed. These 1961-63 models were called by Ford an “integrated pickup”). Today those concerns may be alleviated with use of high strength steel and advanced engineering structures.

    Yes those earlier compact rangers and S10/15 trucks were indeed quite a bit lighter than the full sized trucks at the time. I have had 5 Ford Rangers from 1983 (first year in US) to the 1997 model. All of them including my present long bed 1997 model weighed far less than today’s mid sized trucks that approach the weight of full sized pickups of 20 years ago. Mine is about 3300 odd pounds and that is nicely equipped with a/c ps, pb, cruise, p window/locks, & the long (over 7’ bed), but not 4×4 and equipped with the short cab that less individuals want anymore as people want to use pickups as substitutes for 4 door sedans (which is fine if they like that). Today’s Chevy mid sized trucks approach 4500 pounds in 4×4 with crew cabs… Another monkey wrench in this scenario is that full sized or mid sized truck are more and more and more being sold as 4 door equivalents to the rear drive big 4 door sedans of the past and with 300 lbs of 4×4 and the overall gargantuan sizes they can easily touch about 7000 lbs (such as a F350 crew cab 4×4) tons. Thus with 4 door versions of today’s midsize models it adds more weight to the package and they are indeed acting as family vehicles.

    Ford and other manufacturer’s however also push people into the largest trucks by refusing to offer long beds on their ample sized mid-sized pickups, which they could easily do—And why don’t they? Again it’s the gentleman’s agreement to force people into the even bigger full sized (more expensive) trucks to obtain a long (8 foot) bed. Even further, the “longest bed” option on the new mid-sized trucks is SHORTER than the long bed on my much smaller 1997 ford ranger! The 97 Ranger long bed is over 7 feet in length (as it was on the now extinct S10 and S15/Sonoma), vehicles, today’s Chevy midsize Colorado has a long bed less than 7 feet in length hence the need to spend even more to force you into a really huge truck to get the long bed or the need for a trailer. When I went to Alabama to pick up a restored 1969 Cub Cadet tractor we could not take the Colorado, & had to take the old 97 Ranger because the Colorado bed was too short to fit the tractor & front blade inside the truck bed. Again this does not mean that most people would want the longer bed because of the lack of room this would cause in the shorter cab but certainly some buyers (like myself) would desire this short cab-long bed combo.

    Going back to the “need” for a truck to be macho to be desired, what is happening to our culture when a man is considered un-masculine if he wants such a truly compact truck with these characteristics:
    1.) A set of high aspect ratio tires (like P205/75 R15) to assist driving through snow & muddy roads. (My Ranger XLT came with P225/70 tires. When I switched to the 205/75 series tires the vehicle handled well & cut through snow quite a bit better…& of course the truck looked better—it looked like a truck not a wanna be racer (yes I am aware that the speedo reading was affected by the different aspect ratio & yes it handles well with the change)
    2.) A ground clearance of 8-9”
    3.) A long bed at least 7 feet in length
    Bed sides low enough so that a 5’10” man can reach anything in the middle of the bed without having to add an optional side step to the vehicle!
    4.) A normally aspirated 2.5 Liter 4 cylinder gas engine not diesel (to keep cost of vehicle down & mpg up) cranking out 180-200 hp 150 lb/ft torque or more & running on low octane gas thus also keeping all the macho guys away from this vehicle.
    5.) An ability to tow 3000 lbs equipped standard from the factory
    6.) A 1,400-1,500 bed load limit standard.
    7.) A mechanical limited slip rear axle standard with electronic traction control (that you can switch off) also standard.
    8.) An available short cab with only 2 dang doors &
    9.) a split BENCH SEAT without leather upholstery or seat coolers or seat heaters that can move up or down as well as forward and back and yeah with a recline built in (hey I said I want comfort!) and feels good and is easy to clean.
    10.) 4×4 available but only with manual locking hubs for maximum longevity & durability
    Such a truck would appeal to anyone who wants it to return the maximum amount of practical usefulness for the money for a homeowner (but also for the small business man).

  28. Kit Gerhart Says:

    27 Yep, a perfect opportunity for Hyundai/KIA, Mazda, or any other company not now selling pickups. Maybe Mitsubishi could improve their fortunes in the U.S. by (again) selling a small truck.

  29. Lambo2015 Says:

    #27 Gary Paul I agree with most of your comment. I’m not sure there is any conspiracy or gentleman’s agreement to avoid that market, and I don’t feel that male masculinity has much to do with it either. I grew up when the movie “Back to the Future” came out and everyone thought the little Toyota pick-up was the coolest truck ever. So maybe its just been too long. Although I do remember working on a construction site and many trade guys referred to the S-10 and Rangers as baby pick-ups. So yea someone in the trades that uses their truck everyday for work probably needs a full size for the towing and hauling capability. Many of the guys who bought the small trucks trying to save a few bucks typically ended up trading in for a full size eventually. Beyond that though I truly agree with you that there is still a market for many homeowners and small business owners that would like a small truck. I see lots of electricians and painters that have bought old minivans to fill this void. They don’t need a full size truck but they do need to haul stuff. They take out the seats or fold them down and typically have destroyed the interior using them as pickups.

    I believe if one of the big three truly went back to the basics they would realize the market is still there and could be profitable. They could offer it as you describe a reg cab long bed 4 cyl engine up to a extended or crew cab 4×4 with a strong v6 to fill a pretty diverse need. I think as long as they kept the towing capacity under 4000lbs and hauling under 1500 they would not take much from their full size truck sales. Would probably affect the mid-size tho.

    As we know everything that goes around comes around and the small trucks have been gone long enough they are due for a return. I know Ford is bringing the Mexican made Ranger back but its grown beyond the original design from the 80s. So with any luck they will return soon.

  30. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Yesterday, I saw a “step side” Ranger. It had been a while since I’d seen one of those.

  31. David Sprowl Says:

    I share much of #27′s view points. I have been a pick truck owner since the early 80′s. I have owned gen1 Rangers and gen1 dakotas. I do not like the massive size of today’s truck. Nor do I require one that big. Bed length is critical to me and today’s “mid size” trucks do not get it for me. I switched to an Avalanche. I don’t like the size. But I do like the convertible nature that a mid gate has to offer. I agree there is a market for them, if they are done right. Unlike #27, I want the heated seats. Auto makers could still offer a smaller bed if the back seat could be folded down for usable 8′ + floor.