It purposefully wastes diesel which is already much more expensive than gas. It's dangerous for a variety of reasons. It's illegal in the US and parts of Canada, though apparently not well policed. It's stupid.
I'm sure you have reasons for downplaying this, but I would follow this with "and told them, in your face losers", or something to that effect.
Saying "saving money and hassle" isn't for everyone is suspicious to say the least. Why wouldn't it be for everyone?
Why would I ~ever mention it when it's somehow contentious? Family member in question has a truck that costs ~50% more. Why would I care?
> Saying "saving money and hassle" isn't for everyone is suspicious to say the least. Why wouldn't it be for everyone?
I never told anyone it saved money. I paid ~50% more for an electric Honda Civic. For my area/family group I was a new-tech adopter. I wasn't getting told, "You wasted money!" I was told, "That death trap will explode/catch on fire/not make it through the snow, battery will randomly empty, etc", harangued on the absolute basics on simple fallacies.
This is the response I hate. Detractors say that to argue against any adoption. It's not a claim any sane proponent (Musk is not sane and no one should listen to him) will make. Will it work eventually for (most) use cases? Yea! But likely not everywhere. Just like there are edge cases Gas or Diesel still don't work well. That doesn't mean to ignore potential where it makes sense.
I bought a commuter car. That's it. When I bought; was more of a novelty as I didn't know anyone else with anything similar.
I repeatedly got angrily shouted at while driving (in a relatively major city), coal-rolled; and heckled by strangers and family members around the dinner table about how poor of a decision I made. 3 years later; I have a nice/fun/convenient commuter car that hasn't needed any maintenance and the trade in is higher than I paid for it. Is it for everyone? No. But that doesn't mean there is a void in value.