Find or Sell Used Cars, Trucks, and SUVs in USA

2022 Tesla Model X Plaid on 2040-cars

US $99,950.00
Year:2022 Mileage:25780 Color: -- /
 White
Location:

Advertising:
Vehicle Title:Clean
Engine:Electric Motor (1020 hp )
Fuel Type:Electric
Body Type:--
Transmission:Automatic
For Sale By:Dealer
Year: 2022
VIN (Vehicle Identification Number): 7SAXCBE60NF359326
Mileage: 25780
Make: Tesla
Trim: PLAID
Drive Type: AWD
Features: --
Exterior Color: --
Power Options: --
Interior Color: White
Warranty: Unspecified
Model: Model X
Condition: Used: A vehicle is considered used if it has been registered and issued a title. Used vehicles have had at least one previous owner. The condition of the exterior, interior and engine can vary depending on the vehicle's history. See the seller's listing for full details and description of any imperfections. See all condition definitions

Auto blog

Popular Science magazine's Best Of What's New 2012 all ate up with cars

Tue, 20 Nov 2012

Popular Science has named the winners in its Best of What's New awards, the victors coming in the categories of aerospace, automotive, engineering, entertainment, gadgets, green, hardware, health, home, recreation, security and software. The automotive category did not go wanting for lauded advancements:
Tesla Model S: the Grand Award winner for being "the standard by which all future electric vehicles will be measured."
BMW 328i: it's 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder gets called out for being more powerful and frugal than the six-cylinder it replaces.

EPA says automakers ahead of schedule for 54.5 MPG by 2025

Sat, Apr 26 2014

Remember, the target is 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. Today, the CAFE level is a little over 30. How we get from here to there is something the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is monitoring closely. Thus, the EPA just released an annual flash report on how the auto industry is progressing towards meeting the nation's fuel economy goals. Overall, the industry is doing almost 10 grams per mile (equivalent) better than the rules require. The good news is that the industry is a bit ahead of schedule. In the report (see page iii), the EPA breaks things down by automaker based only on MY12 numbers. Tesla is at the top of the list (which is ranked by over-compliance with 2012MY CO2 standards), but for our money, the real leader is Toyota. The Japanese automaker built the second-highest number of vehicles (2,020,248, after General Motors' 2,364,374) but racked up the most net 2012 over-compliance credits (13,163,009 metric tons). That's an average of over 6.5 metric tons per vehicle. The next closest is Honda, with just over five metric tons of credits per vehicle. Given the MPG fiasco with Hyundai and Kia, the EPA says, "we are excluding Hyundai and Kia data because of the ongoing investigation into their testing methods," but overall, the rest of the industry has credits worth 25,053,168 metric tons of CO2, which means it's doing almost 10 grams per mile (equivalent) better than the rules require. Go team. For now, the numbers in this report (and there are a lot more of them – get the 59-page PDF for yourself here), can't really be used to understand everything from the first year of the new CAFE program. The EPA writes, "Because the program allows credits and deficits to be carried into future years, at the close of the 2012 model year no manufacturer is considered to be out of compliance with the program. ... Compliance with the 2012 model year standards can't be fully assessed until the end of the 2015 model year." There are a more interesting tidbits in the report, such as the fact that Fisker produced 1,415 model year 2012 vehicles, Tesla made 2,952. Remember, too, that CAFE numbers don't equal the fuel economy you see in your daily drives. In the real world, the 54.5 CAFE level will be about 40 mpg, and the average fuel economy today is around 25 mpg, so we have a ways to go, no matter how you measure it. EPA Report: Data Show Automakers on Track in meeting Greenhouse Gas Standards WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S.

Tesla appears to be winning direct sales battle in Missouri

Wed, May 14 2014

Last week, it looked like Missouri would join the list of states where Tesla Motors would not be allowed to sell its all-electric vehicles directly to consumers. Without warning, language was inserted into a bill about off-road vehicles what would have prevented direct sales in the state. Tesla called it a "sneak attack" and tried to get supporters to let lawmakers know the law was a bad idea. "It is not clear that the statues apply to a seller like Tesla" – Missouri Department of Revenue Thanks to some digging by Tesla fans over at the Tesla Motors Club, it became clear that one of the main drivers of the anti-Tesla legislation was conservative state senator Mike Kehoe, a former Ford and Lincoln-Mercury auto dealer. For some time, Kehoe has been asking the Missouri Department of Revenue if Tesla should have gotten a license to operate its one store in the state (in St. Louis) and said that the automaker's moves were, "clearly designed to circumvent the traditional franchise model for the distribution and sale of new motor vehicles." The DOR responded by saying, "It is clear under Missouri law that traditional manufacturers who already have franchised dealerships in the state may not sell cars directly to consumers. It is not clear that the statues apply to a seller like Tesla, which apparently has not entered into franchise relationships with independent dealers." After Kehoe got that response, it seems, he added the language to the bill. You can read the bill here. The tide may be turning against the proposed law, though. Tesla has apparently hired 10 lobbyists to makes its case. Local newspaper The Kansas City Star published an opinion column yesterday in support of the automaker. "As a business offering something new and better for the environment overall, Tesla should have been given allowances to operate in a different way in the state," the paper wrote. And the state House Republican majority leader, John Diehl, says he has no plans to move the bill forward because lawmakers are worried it would put a limit on the free market and have unintended consequences. Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2014/05/12/5019618/missouri-house-leader-not-fond.html#storylink=cp