logo
1981 Ford Escort GLX Test: World-Class Shrinky Dink

1981 Ford Escort GLX Test: World-Class Shrinky Dink

Car and Driver11-07-2025
From the January 1981 issue of Car and Driver.
The editorial we have been feeling the hot breath of America on the backs of our necks while working on this road test. Everybody right down to the butcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker has been looking over our shoul­ders, trying to get a rating on the new Ford Escort. No Ford in memory has produced such widespread interest ("concern" may be a better word). Some of the concerned are potential customers looking for the latest development in fuel-efficient cars: they won­der if the Escort is it. Others have a more academic question: is the Escort the long-awaited import fighter from Detroit? All that heavy breathing ruf­fling our collars tells us you really want to know. So let's get down to business.
Conclusion No. 1: The Escort is indeed a world-class small car with a combina­tion of interior space and fuel economy that should make it one of the top choices in its class. It may not have the most interior space, or the best economy, or the lowest trunk liftover height, or the highest marks in any other category of small-car virtue you might name, but it's competitive on every front.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
Conclusion No. 2: The Escort is the first small car from anywhere to offer Mr. and Mrs. America big-car comfort and luxury in a small package. Moreover, the long options list will make them feel right at home. This is a cushy car that just happens to be small.
Conclusion No. 3: We don't want to sound elitist or anything like that, but we think Mr. and Mrs. America will probably be happier in Escorts than will car enthusiasts. This is no fling-about Fiesta, no rompin' Rabbit. There are no come-on-and-flog-me urgings coursing up the shift lever and the steering col­umn. The Escort is just trying to be another nice car in the Ford family of nice cars—a mini LTD.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
Naturally, we would have preferred an Escort with verve, but the mini-LTD personality has a charm of its own. You find it strongest in the interior. The test car is a GLX in a range of models that starts with a plain Escort and moves up in steps called L, GL, GLX, and SS. So it's not the grandest, but it's right up there. And the first thing you see when you open the door is American Plush. The carpets are deep. The door panels are soft. The seats are foamy. The in­strument panel is a big, bluff-faced molding just like those of the larger Fords, and it contains only a speedome­ter and a gas gauge, a layout also just like those of the larger Fords. And the luxo, poly-spoke steering wheel is out­fitted with thumb buttons for the op­tional cruise control, just as the larger Fords are. Can Toyota and Volkswagen match this? No way.
It's easy to be cynical about such frills, to say that if Ford had spent more time working on the basics like engine performance (which we'll get to later) instead of diddling around with the money-grubbing options, it might have produced a car we'd all be foaming over. But never mind. You can't get mad at the GLX when it's such a nice (well, it is) package. The seats are foam-­filled, have adjustable recliners, and are as good as the best Detroit has ever made. The dash has four big, swiveling vents to move air in a hurry. The top of the dash has been molded into a huge travel tray for cigarettes, sunglasses, or in case you need some place to melt your Hershey bars. This is American-car comfort and convenience all the way.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
You also get gadgets to play with. The blue-glowing electronic digital clock has buttons for date, elapsed time, and time of day. A map light on a stalk swings down out of the ceiling and swiv­els around in case you want to check somebody's tonsils. The AM/FM-stereo has a little button hidden down by your knee marked "Amplifier On-Off," and when you give it a pull, a pilot light comes on and the music gets really won­derful. None of this stuff has anything to do with economy or efficiency or en­gineering for the Eighties. It's just that Ford always made LTDs this way, so it's making mini LTDs this way too. What could be more natural? Sure, you can have a hair-shirt Escort if you want one, but that sort of low-calorie aspiration is not what made Detroit great. The Es­cort is an American small car.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
Not that there hasn't been inspiration from elsewhere. You can tell that Ford designers have been combing over the Honda Accord, trying to steal the es­sence of that car, to transplant its con­siderable appeal into the Escort. But typical of Detroit, they saw only the gimmicks. Honda's most notable inno­vation in instrument-panel design is the "pictograph," a green-glowing outline drawing of the car styled along the theme of a directional gyro in an air­plane. All it does is tell you when a door is open, the tailgate ajar, or the like. But it looks very space-age and makes first­-timers say, "Oh, lookit that!" So Ford swiped the idea. If you go GLX or bet­ter, you get a little pictograph down by your ankle on the console with warning lights that glow red for low fluids or malfunctioning head, tail, or brake lights, and yellow in the case of low fuel. Honda also dazzled the industry with its coin trays for parking-meter money. Ditto the Escort.
But getting back to the point, Ford wants you to open the Escort door and see American-style luxury and Japanese­-style gimmicks (called "product con­tent" in the industry): the best of both worlds, as they say. Thus overwhelmed, you then sign the check.
The assumption is that Americans will buy comfort, they'll buy features, they'll buy flash, and they'll buy economy as defined by EPA mpg numbers. So those areas are where the design effort was concentrated. And in those areas the Escort does very well. But driving fun? What's that?
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
Just the way the clutch works says a lot about the direction of Escort engi­neering. The pedal has a rather long travel, but the machinery all hooks up in the space of about an eighth-inch: clunk. And pedal effort does not dimin­ish in a predictable way as you let out the clutch either. You just have to feel it out, feel it out, feel it out: clunk. Mr. and Mrs. America probably won't no­tice, but you will. And you'll conclude that the Escort is transportation rather than fun.
The numb-clutch syndrome is also apparent in the suspension. It acts as though it has very little free travel. A brisk boogie on an expressway ramp has it rocking laterally, feeling very much as though it was bouncing off the bump stops. Put a couple people in the car, encounter a modest chuckhole, and again it recoils off the bump stops. Even straight down the freeway it's a little bouncy ("vertically active" in engineer talk). The Escort's suspension just wasn't endowed with the resilience and precision an enthusiast hopes for. How­ever, ultimate cornering forces are not bad at all for a front-drive car, particu­larly a new-generation Detroiter with tires optimized for low rolling resist­ance. The Escort circulated the skidpad at 0.71 g, which is a laudable accom­plishment. Some of the credit must be given to the optional alloy wheels, which are 5.5 inches wide, up a half-inch from the optional steel wheels and up a full inch from the standard equipment.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
The Escort's 1600 cc hemi engine is another component that falls short of the enthusiast's hopes. Ford went to a lot of trouble with the hardware parts of this engine—an aluminum head, an electron-beam-welded intake manifold, a crossflow port arrangement with an­gled valves and fully machined combus­tion chambers—but then tried to get by without the sophisticated on-board computers that all GM and many Chrys­ler models are using to optimize fuel flow, spark advance, EGR, and the like. The results have been nearly disastrous. The Escort does reasonably well in economy—30 mpg EPA with a four-­speed manual transmission and a short options list—but the sacrifices necessary to get economy and meet emissions without the aid of a computer have killed performance dead as a hammer. The car is very slow—zero to sixty in 14.6 seconds, standing quarter-mile in 19.4 seconds at 69 mph. This is more leisurely performance than even the Honda Accord's, which typically brings up the rear in small-car acceleration.
Moreover, the Escort labors mightily to attain whatever speed it can. Under hard acceleration, the engine climbs through several stages of roar—like a Weed Eater progressing from quack grass through the petunia patch and into a stand of maple saplings. This mastication is accompanied by vigorous buzzings transmitted up through your leg by the accelerator. The sound-level meter reports 89 dBA at the driver's ear during such a forced march, and that is louder than almost any other small car in the class.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
Yet here's the contradiction. We think Mr. and Mrs. America will find the Es­cort a quiet car. For one thing, they won't run it to 50 mph in second gear in fits of enthusiastic driving. And that sort of flat-out operation is the only circum­stance in which it is really noisy. Every­day driving for everyday citizens con­sists mostly of idling at traffic lights and constant-speed cruising at speeds below 65 mph. Here the Escort is quieter than most of the competition. And this, in turn, means that one of the main annoy­ances associated with travel in small cars—the auditory assault factor—just isn't a problem in an Escort.
The other problem with small cars on long trips—lack of interior space—is also handled nicely in the Escort. The hatchback lifts to expose an uncommon­ly deep trunk, the sort of compartment that allows you to stow suitcases verti­cally; and if this isn't enough, the rear seat folds flat in typical hatchback style to open up just over 30 cubic feet of luggage space.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
If your cargo is just people, they fare well too. The universal standard for people packaging is the VW Rabbit. We find the back-seat room of the Escort to be even better. Headroom is slightly less, but still good enough for six-foot­ers, and the Escort has better knee clearance. The VW achieves much of its comfort with "chair-height" seats and a high roofline for head clearance; the Es­cort provides a similar feeling in a lower car by depressing the floorpan in the area a back-seat passenger uses for foot­room. This is an old Detroit trick, done for years in low-roof coupes, and usual­ly the depressions were about the size and shape of dishpans and just rein­forced the feeling of cramped quarters. But for a small tunnel, the Escort has a low floor from sill to sill. Your feet are treated to as much room as the rest of you, which is to say, a very generous amount for such a small car.
So much for the coach-class passen­gers. Those up front have royal treat­ment, at least in a GLX-trim car loaded with options. On the surface, however, this complement of extras seems contra­dictory to the concept of a small car. How are we going to know if the Escort is successful as an import fighter when we're looking at an example loaded like the typical domestic?
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
Let us answer this way. First, the Es­cort isn't really intended to be a bot­tom-of-the-market economy car. The Honda Civic, Toyota Tercel, Toyota Starlet, and Datsun 210 come in under it. And second, we suspect the real role of the Escort is less to fight imports and more to provide a next step for Ameri­cans who wish to downsize. These motorists are accustomed to a certain level of comfort and luxury; the Escort offers it in a smaller package with better fuel economy. In this regard, the test GLX is enormously successful. And for that reason, we're going to keep it around for another year as a long-term test car. We'll report back to you from time to time on its durability and on how well it adapts to life in a changing America. Watch this space.
Counterpoints
Do we have an irreversible inferiority complex over here? The home team has again failed to grasp the importance of building good small cars. Ford, oblivious to better examples, has fallen into the trap of building merely small cars, think­ing that would be good enough.
This Escort should have been called the Squirrel. Its handling and braking are thoroughly unpredictable, having been rubbered to death by the ride brigade. Performance is anemic, and mileage is nowhere near the best. The steering is wishy-washy on the highway, the clutch snaps over center with a clunk, and the shifter plings like a fingernail on a tin can. And Ford should get some sort of perpet­ual prize for coarse engine harmonics.
High marks (these are compliments, now) for seating comfort, driving posi­tion, roominess, and outward visibility. Too bad you have to go inside the cheap-­looking interior to find a few high points. Fortunately for Ford, the low points will probably creep right under the noses of a multitude of Escort buyers, who will go home thinking they're safe for the winter, nuts gathered by Ford's Squirrel. —Larry Griffin
Somewhere in the management ranks of Ford Motor Company North America there must be a man who gets paid a lot of money to insist that Ameri­cans will be most comfortable with little cars designed to be just as out of touch as the big cars they replace. If there is such a man, the introduction of the new Ameri­can Escort is his finest hour. Our test car is well appointed, quiet, and comfortable at rest, but a sore trial in motion. It suf­fers from a nasty pitching moment, a fore-and-aft hobby-horsing that is guaran­teed to bring back carsickness as an adult affliction. The little devil's engine and drivetrain would be delighted to cruise all day at 75 or 80, but the ride quality makes that almost unendurable. Europeans are now getting their first look at Escorts that go faster, ride more smoothly, handle better, and are infinitely more handsome than the one done up by the troubled technoids in Dearborn. My advice to the reader would be to go buy a Fiesta. My advice to Ford North America would be to call Ford Germany and ask Bob Lutz to come over and make our Escort as nice as theirs. —David E. Davis. Jr.
View Photos
Aaron Kiley
|
Car and Driver
This is one unhappy little lump of a car. The fit and finish of the interior are be­low par. The engine drones. The steering is rubbery. The ride is undisciplined. The tall gearing works against the engine. In general, the Escort reminds me of an ado­lescent, all awkward and self-conscious.
All of this tells me that Ford's American design team cut too many corners, think­ing the masses wouldn't notice, or that the product planners misjudged what America expects of an econobox, or that the engineers simply lacked the know-­how to create a world-class world car.
This is not to say that the Escort is without merit. The overall packaging is excellent. Rear-seat comfort is exception­al. And its gas mileage is good as well. So the Escort should do well enough in the workaday world, serving people who think of cars as nothing more than travel appliances.
All of the ingredients for a sparkling small sedan are here—on paper at least. Let's hope Ford management has a change of heart and sees fit to finish what it started. —Rich Ceppos
Specifications
Specifications
1981 Ford Escort GLX
Vehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $6476/$7789
Options: air conditioning, $524; aluminum wheels, $183; cruise control, $128; AM/FM·stereo radio, $100; rear wiper·washer, $94; premium sound system, $91; power brakes, $76; tinted glass, $70; cloth and vinyl upholstery, $27; heavy-duty battery, $20.
ENGINE
SOHC 8-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head
Displacement: 97 in3, 1600 cm3
Power: 69 bhp @ 5000 rpm
Torque: 86 lb-ft @ 3200 rpm
TRANSMISSION
4-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/struts
Brakes, F/R: 9.3-in vented disc/7.1-in drum
Tires: Goodyear Arriva
P165/80R-13
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 94.2 in
Length: 163.9 in
Width: 65.9 in
Height: 53.3 in
Passenger Volume, F/R: 47/39 ft3
Trunk Volume: 16 ft3
Curb Weight: 2140 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 14.6 sec
1/4-Mile: 19.4 sec @ 69 mph
80 mph: 31.8 sec
Top Gear, 30–50 mph: 15.2 sec
Top Gear, 50–70 mph: 20.4 sec
Top Speed: 87 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 217 ft
Roadholding, 282-ft Skidpad: 0.71 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 24 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 33/28/44 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

GM CFO looks to strategic pricing, costs to blunt $1.1B tariff impact
GM CFO looks to strategic pricing, costs to blunt $1.1B tariff impact

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

GM CFO looks to strategic pricing, costs to blunt $1.1B tariff impact

This story was originally published on CFO Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily CFO Dive newsletter. Dive Brief: General Motors executives highlighted trade deals between Canada, Mexico and South Korea as important to its outlook as it navigates what CFO Paul Jacobson called a 'dynamic' tariff environment, with the automaker reporting a $1.1 billion net tariff impact for its second quarter ended June 30. The impact was slightly lower than expected, with the Detroit-based automaker anticipating such costs will therefore be slightly higher for its next quarter, Jacobson said Tuesday during the company's Q2 earnings call. GM has continued to import vehicles from South Korea, as they are 'contribution-margin positive and they're very much in demand,' CEO Mary Barra said. 'We're not speculating on what those are going to look like going forward, but there is a possibility and a likelihood, if you will, that ultimately a tariff rate gets set at a lower level, which would ultimately bring that impact down,' Jacobson said regarding deals with the three countries. Dive Insight: GM is one of several automakers looking to mitigate the effects from tariff uncertainty as the Trump administration presses on with a trade war involving key trade partners. That includes a back-and-forth between Canada and Mexico regarding levies on steel imports, which the U.S. hiked to 50% in May, CFO Dive sister publication Supply Chain Dive previously reported. The Trump administration in recent days has negotiated a new trade framework with Indonesia and reached terms for a tariff agreement with Japan, which would set a 15% levy on imports from the country including for cars and auto parts, Supply Chain Dive reported. South Korea, a critical exporter of semiconductors, automobiles and smartphones, is set to hold high-level talks with the U.S. on July 25 in an attempt to reach a compromise, Bloomberg reported. The talks are scheduled to occur before Aug. 1, when the U.S. plans to impose a 25% tariff on critical imports. Exports made up 40% of South Korea's gross domestic product last year. Tariffs on South Korea imports would constitute a significant portion of the overall trade impact GM forecasts for 2025, Jacobson said Tuesday. The company anticipates from $4 billion to $5 billion in gross impact from import duties during 2025, he said in response to analyst questions. The automaker expects roughly $2 billion will involve South Korea. GM is taking steps to blunt some of the disruption, including making some 'short-term shifts' in production to the U.S., Barra said in response to questions. The company expects to be able to mitigate around 30% of its projected gross tariff impact through 'strategic actions such as manufacturing adjustments, targeted cost initiatives and consistent pricing,' Jacobson said. 'Over time, we remain confident that our total tariff expense will come down as bilateral trade deals emerge, and our sourcing and production adjustments are implemented,' Jacobson said. While the automaker continued to handle tariff uncertainty and other challenges — for example, increased competition contributed to moderation for its fleet pricing in the quarter, according to its earnings report — GM also reported strong growth across its brands, contributing to record revenue of $91 billion for the first half of the year. The automaker saw particularly robust demand for its electric vehicles: Q2 EV sales rose by 111% year-over-year, representing 16% of the U.S. EV market, according to its earnings presentation. Chevrolet EVs — which are now the second top selling such vehicle in the U.S — rose by 146% YoY for the quarter. 'I want to be clear that our EV journey is about giving consumers choice. And over the last few years, a steady number of consumers are choosing electric vehicles,' Jacobson said of GM's EV offerings, noting the automaker sees 'significant growth potential.' With the company having built out a 'robust' portfolio of EVs, 'our investment focus has turned to driving down costs and improving profitability,' he said. The results come as the broader EV market continues to face challenges of its own. As part of the massive tax-and-spending bill recently signed into law by President Donald Trump, for example, a $7,500 EV tax credit for purchasers will end in September, which could lead to a spike in prices for such vehicles and undermine demand, CNBC reported. 'While we are still seeking further clarification on certain aspects, we anticipate these changes to have a minimal impact on our 2025 results,' Jacobson said of EV regulations. Recommended Reading Costco CFO says 50 cent wage increase poses expense 'headwind' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Get Ready To Thank Tariffs For Making Cheap Cars More Expensive
Get Ready To Thank Tariffs For Making Cheap Cars More Expensive

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Get Ready To Thank Tariffs For Making Cheap Cars More Expensive

Brace yourself for an alarming statistic. A whopping 92 percent of new vehicles sold in the U.S. priced under $30,000 are imports. The eight percent that aren't do not exactly constitute a rounding error, but you would not be unfairly criticized if you argued that basically all America's cheap cars come from someplace else. The stat comes from and the site's Industry Insights Report for the first half of 2025, which concludes that the Trump administration's tariffs are "disproportionately affecting" the cheap car market. For the record, the only American-made cars that cost less than 30 grand are not domestic models: we're talking about the stalwart Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla. OK, technically speaking these are "American" cars because they're made in U.S. factories, but the ugly truth is that cheap vehicles from Ford and GM are imports from Mexico, China, and South Korea. According to the study, the supply of these inexpensive rides is going to dry up, triggering price increases as tariffs kick in through the second half of the year. You might ask yourself why the U.S. market relies so heavily on imports to stock the under-$30,000 segment. The answer is high labor costs in America, but that isn't the whole story. Cheap cars aren't very profitable, if they're profitable at all. GM, Ford, and Stellantis (owner of the Jeep, Chrysler, Dodge, and RAM brands) would rather sell you a more expensive pickup truck or large SUV than a compact sedan and are happy to make those vehicles in U.S. plants. Read more: These Are Your Favorite Factory Exhaust Designs Why Are All The Cheap Cars Imported? For decades, the manufacturing of small, cheap vehicles has effectively been outsourced to other countries. This has enabled American companies to remain in the segment. Tariffs are upsetting this arrangement. For auto executives, the way forward is mostly bad. Years ago, I covered a briefing at the Detroit Auto Show by then-FCA CEO Sergio Marchionne, and he was completely unflinching in his assessment of the affordable small-car market in the U.S. It was for the foreign carmakers to dominate, as in his view they had figured out how to make an acceptable margin. When interest rates were low, this arrangement actually wasn't a major issue – buyers simply financed their way into more expensive vehicles, and for years the average transaction price on new cars and trucks has been trending up (although lately its been in moderate retreat). But interest rates aren't low anymore. And with tariffs, cheap cars are about to get more expensive. There was a run on new-car sales in early 2025 when tariffs were announced, as consumers sought to snap up vehicles before the import taxes hit and the automakers rolled out incentives to move the metal off dealer lots. That phase now appears to be ending, and the U.S. market is preparing to accept a new normal. The question is whether more domestic manufacturing will come online or whether carmakers will reduce production as prices invariably rise and demand flags. Could The U.S. Market Remake Itself? I don't see a scenario in which cheap vehicles suddenly aren't imported in droves. So if tariffs aren't dialed back, the entry-level tier is set up for a world of hurt. It's depressing to consider this outcome after decades of Americans enjoying the world's most competitive market and having access to all manner of choice when it comes time to purchase a new set of wheels. Supporters of Trump's tariffs will insist that the policy will force automakers to increase U.S. production, build factories here, and ultimately hire more U.S. workers. But students of Trump's actual motives understand that what he and his trade advisors might actually want is to compel exporters to eat the tariffs, effectively paying a substantial toll for access to the U.S. market. That idea relies on prices somehow not going up, and of course Trump has jawboned the car companies to shield consumers from the well-understood economics of tariffs. They might play along. But that would mean they'll lose even more money on inexpensive cars than they are already. The logical response would be to reduce supply. In the near term, we're likely to see fewer sub-$30,000 cars available as tariffs make life far more unpleasant for the segment. Want more like this? Join the Jalopnik newsletter to get the latest auto news sent straight to your inbox... Read the original article on Jalopnik.

Tesla's stock is tumbling after Elon Musk failure to shift the narrative
Tesla's stock is tumbling after Elon Musk failure to shift the narrative

CNN

time7 hours ago

  • CNN

Tesla's stock is tumbling after Elon Musk failure to shift the narrative

Elon Musk's big promises apparently no longer seem to be enough for many Tesla investors. Shares of Tesla (TSLA) fell 9% on Thursday following another dismal earnings report, released after the bell Wednesday. Tesla's earnings and revenue both fell by double-digit percentages following the biggest sales drop in the company's history. The automaker also faces a number of financial headwinds, including the loss of a $7,500 tax credit for US EV buyers starting in October, and the vanishing market for regulatory credit sales, which has earned Tesla $11 billion since 2019. But Tesla CEO Elon Musk barely talked about that on the earnings call Wednesday, although he did acknowledge the company 'probably could have a few rough quarters.' Instead, he talked about his grand vision for the future, including Tesla's long-promised robotaxi service; and its humanoid robot, Optimus, which is still in development. The lack of details about the company's plans to solve problems in the near term disappointed some investors and analysts. 'Investors have been very forgiving of Tesla for several quarters now, despite obvious headwinds to their business,' Garrett Nelson, analyst at CFRA Research, told CNN Thursday. 'But I think its investors are taking a more realistic view of the story at this point. Some of his brilliance has been his ability to keep investors focused on the long term and ignoring the near term and intermediate term. Now, headwinds are difficult to ignore.' Nelson downgraded the company's stock to a neutral rating in April. But even some of the Tesla bulls on Wall Street are saying that the time for Musk to take action is running out. 'The street is losing some patience,' Wedbush Securities tech analyst Dan Ives told CNN Thursday, although he said he still believes in the autonomous vehicle and artificial intelligence vision laid out by Musk and Tesla. Musk has made big promises about his robotaxi service, including that it would be in service within a year as early as 2019. Tesla's robotaxis finally rolled out in June this year, albeit in a limited portion of Austin, Texas, to friends and fans of the company, and with an employee sitting beside the empty driver's seat. However, that limited rollout wasn't enough to stop Musk from making extraordinary claims on Wednesday that the service would be available to half the nation's population by year's end. To achieve that, Tesla will need to get regulatory permission to operate in two states per week through the rest of the year, including New York, which does not allow autonomous vehicles on its roads. Morningstar analyst Seth Goldstein said that while he does believe Tesla will eventually be successful in its robotaxi venture, 'the software will require further testing' and he does not expect a full robotaxi product until 2028. But Musk has a history of making grand promises that do not pan out. Like the Cybertruck – the only new vehicle Tesla has offered in the last six years. Musk said Tesla was supposed to be delivering 250,000 vehicles annually by this year. But full-year sales of the Cybertruck and Tesla's two other expensive models were less than 80,000. Sales of the three plunged 52% in the most recent quarter. Tesla also started the year forecasting it would achieve higher sales following its first annual sales drop in its history in 2024. But after two quarters of record sales declines, most investors now assume that it will not meet that goal either. And with Musk himself barely mentioning car sales during an hour-long conference call, it doesn't appear that is enough for shareholders any longer. 'We are mixed on Tesla's ability to meet its robotaxi timelines, cost targets, and scale,' wrote Ben Kallo, an analyst for Baird, in a note to clients late Wednesday. 'So far Tesla has received a pass due to how ambitious/revolutionary these products are, but we think continued sluggishness in the auto business could cause more focus on the near term.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store