Additionally, the tax code allows corporations to fully depreciate a vehicle in a single year if it has a GVRW of >6,000lb. This is why corporate guys drive commercially registered trucks. You think my father scuffs his bed? No way Jose! 

From an European perspective it is difficult to understand pick-ups as luxury vehicles. Crudeness aside, the stuff you leave in the bed (which would otherwise be in the boot) is in the open where it can get damaged / wet (if it rains) / stolen / etc. Why would you want one if you don’t use it as a work vehicle?

TBH I’m astonished anyone is buying anything right now. I get the general churn, lease returns, replacement after being totalled etc but just who are the people spending $50k plus on a new car/suv/truck!? WHO!?

I have gone for a number of socially distant joyrides in my Fiata in the past month. Nothing like a nice drive down to the Gulf after a day flying my desk.

Exactly this. The financial/employment impact of the pandemic and related downturn has very much been focused on low wage earners (the likely market for compact cars), while upper income workers have so far been largely unscathed (a much higher percentage of high wage jobs can be done remotely).

To be fair, there will be a lot of people who are in more precarious situations than they currently think they are who will end up saddled with a car they can’t afford.

It’s true. Not everyone has been affected financially by the pandemic. But then we have this:

the obvious difference is that sports cars aren’t a physical menace on the road like the average pickup truck. Even if the driver is an asshole, I can still see around the car and the car’s driver can probably see me. The full-size pickup driver can’t see whats directly in front of, or behind him.

Carry, haul, off road, and tow,

You can rent a truck to deal with occasional hauling tasks for far less than outright ownership.

::Carnac puts envelope to head::

Modern trucks are literally a no-compromise vehicle. If I’m investing $30,000+ in transportation for my family, I don’t want it to only work for some applications.

It’s not about hating people who have legitimate uses for pickups, it’s the suburban idiots who think they need a $65,000 truck to haul barkdust twice a year.

The thing is, Porsche gets to decide what test to do. If the other test would have given better numbers, then Porsche would have chosen that test. The EPA didn’t force them to take the short test.  The only reasonable explanation is that the full 5 tests yielded numbers that were even worse. Why would Porsche…

“However, unlike marimvibe, my gripe is the Tesla 3's completely stupid interior.”

No, your links don’t support your claims. You might think they do, but that’s your bias at work, causing you to misinterpret them or make incorrect inferences that you wrongly treat as factual.

Yep this. Things like this make me understand how and why Tesla’s sales pretty much make up the entirety of the EV market. 

Better yet, order a M3 Performance which equals this Porsche in acceleration for half the price.  You gotta really not care about money and really do care about image and exclusivity to want the Porsche over a Tesla.  

Uhm, the MPGe test is the energy consumption that looks at efficiency. Carbon testing is a completely different test then the EPA 5 cycle test. Even two gas cars with same mpg can release a different amount of carbon.

I wonder why they skipped the tests. It’s not credible to believe that Porsche didn’t have the resources to do the tests, so there must be some advantage that Porsche got from skipping them.