WOW! What a piece of shit!

That's it!! Time to ban airsoft guns! And 9 year olds

My Java II teacher spent the first two weeks of class showing us pie charts of job openings and preaching how many openings there were in CE and how few applicants there were...it was painful.

Want to make good money? Want good internship opportunities during school? Want to be hired before you graduate? Want good job security? Want to make things? Engineering ftw

Gotta be Kyle Busch on Ron Hornady in that truck series race where he wrecked him under caution. Or any Kyle Busch bitchfit meltdown.

Yeup. I'm glad oppo didn't get the ax

Not true...here's an E46 M3 wagon

They were all buggy so it doesn't really matter

Merging onto a 60-70mph highway at 45 mph

1) EPA has rated the top battery equipped S at 265 miles compared to Tesla's 300 miles.

Alright. If this isn't a top 10 selling car within 5 years I expect a full retraction.

1) No electric car yet has come close to its advertised range on a typical basis so far.

You honestly mean to tell me you don't find a critical lack of range a huge Achilles heel? Ridiculous. 99% of people are not prepared to pay 5 series money for a car that won't drive 200 miles. I list a few faults and then find extra special issue with one and that makes my argument flawed? Not a chance. This is the…

Yes the 1%! Other $50,000 cars are endlessly practical, often luxurious and can carry more passengers and cargo. This car has (if Tesla isn't bullshitting) 300 miles of range between charges. This car can't be compared to similar gasoline powered luxury sedans because they can be refueled instantly whenever and are a…

11 miles!? Is that for real?

Much of the bashing comes from a few things. A) Musk is a serial liar, B) this car would not be possible without enormous help from the government (me, you, all of us) because the demand isn't there for this technology yet because the ICE is still getting better. So not only is this car very expensive for the 1% who…

All those charges and I'm sure she will be free and back on the road in a couple days to do the same thing again...

Ok ok. As I said I didn't have time to read the whole thing and skimmed the likely important parts and missed about half a page of some decent meat. Now that I've read it top to bottom, they do raise some good points. I will say, however, that the lifespan used for the Hummer is likely military data from the Humvee…

So it's okay for the first article to question validity of sources but I can't? Neither article brings up any new convincing data. I'm not saying there aren't discrepancies and I already said this before, neither of the articles scientifically DISPROVES the first one. In the conclusion of the pac ist article they flat…

"I'm just trying to do a little honest self promotion."