Amazing to me the knee jerk response from most people is to criticize this company. Yes they have issues (as does literally every brand/company), but on the whole aren't we glad people are leading the charge towards electric vehicles? They've sped up the advent of electric vehicles by at least 5 years, possibly more like 10.
Looking forward to seeing this company continue to thrive.
It's quite possible to support the goal and criticize the players, especially when those players repeatedly fail to execute and use the lofty goal as an excuse for their failings instead of learning from their mistakes and getting better.
And why should Tesla get the credit for making green cars a thing? True credit belongs to Toyota for introducing the Prius 2 decades ago when gas was king and getting consumers to see alternative engines as viable options, and to California for its green vehicles incentives for making possible the financial structure that has kept Tesla alive.
> It's quite possible to support the goal and criticize the players, especially when those players repeatedly fail to execute
Repeatedly fail to execute? They've successfully rolled out several wildly popular fully electric cars. They've succeeded in making electric cars cool.
> And why should Tesla get the credit for making green cars a thing? True credit belongs to Toyota for introducing the Prius 2 decades ago when gas was king and getting consumers to see alternative engines as viable options, and to California for its green vehicles incentives for making possible the financial structure that has kept Tesla alive.
Toyota succeeded on one side of the equation: Creating the first commercially successful eco-car. Tesla succeeded in making them cool, and appealing to people who like cars. You need both of these things if you want to actually replace gas-powered cars.
ya but neither of those 2 things (Toyota's Prius 2, and California's green car incentives) were successful in making car manufacturers wake up and go electric. It was only when Tesla started making money that every car manufacturer is being serious about competing in this space, and even then they are behind.
Curious to see why you think credit goes to Toyota, instead of Tesla?
Toyota has tried VERY hard to get hydrogen fuel cell cars to be "the thing" over electric vehicles. Tesla never said they wanted to make green cars a thing, they said they want to "accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy"[1]
I don't think Tesla wants the credit. Open source patents and a simple desire to drive adoption of technology.
I think the eye brow around the criticism is people creating a straw man to knock down.
Tesla doesn't ask for credit and only seems to celebrate the successes which are big wins for all of us regardless of whether we buy their cars or not.
If the critique is that they miss production goals, then the defense is that hey are doing remarkably well for any company attempting to overcome these challenges.
If the critique is that _because_ they are missing production goals they don't deserve praise then well....they didn't ask for praise for it so folks can just keep it and move along.
Well, I would like to get a Model 3, yet I want Tesla to get glitches out of their production first. I am sure v2 will be much better (sw/hw issues, trim quality, gaps etc).
And then they need to start all over with Model Y. What quality expectations are there?
FYI, Tesla doesn't really do "versions" like v2. They're always trying to improve "sw/hw issues, trim quality, gaps etc" over time. So those issues will get better over time without ever announcing a "v2".
And yes, I'm sure the first Model Ys will also have issues that should improve over time.
1. individual cars are a dumb way to "fix" the environment, they're hyper resource intensive and have so many problems
2. the good way is to build mass transit and radically change society, which is a political issue. tesla comes in a long tradition of sucking public funding into a private entity which cuts across that
3. additionally tesla propagandizes against the above
> 1. individual cars are a dumb way to "fix" the environment, they're hyper resource intensive and have so many problems
This may have been a poor way to say it, but it is the truth.
We will not buy or consume our way out of climate change or negative externalities that affect the environment.
> 2. the good way is to build mass transit and radically change society, which is a political issue. tesla comes in a long tradition of sucking public funding into a private entity which cuts across that
Again, a poor choice of words for an otherwise good point: if we want to see a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, we need to move away from the idea of ubiquitous transportation via personal vehicles.
> the good way is to build mass transit and radically change society, which is a political issue. tesla comes in a long tradition of sucking public funding into a private entity which cuts across that
I don't understand how people can simultaneously hold this belief and then act surprised when others criticize the "green movement" as just an excuse to control people.
Modern personal transportation is one of the ultimate expressions of individual freedom. We're making it cleaner, we're reducing externalities, and still environmentalists want to herd people onto busses and trains.
Agreed. Consumerism is part of the problem. People don't want to think about the fact that we might have to accept a different standard of living in order to fight climate change.
I don't want say anything bad about mass transit for large cities where it makes sense. But you have to reach a certain economy of scale before trains become more efficient than cars. A train with just a couple of people uses far more power than a car does.
We can do a lot to encourage people to live closer together by ending subsidies, removing zoning laws, etc. But in the end we still need farmers and other professions living spread out across the country. We can't achieve perfect urbanization. And given that electric cars are going to be a necessary part of getting to zero emissions.
I live near one of the busiest highways in the country and it's just sorta background noise for the neighborhood. I'm not sure people realize not only how much exhaust is spewing out of that road, but also the noise. The volume level of major cities is going to decrease dramatically.
At highway speeds, the sound of a modern cars (ICE or otherwise) is mostly tire noise. Electric cars are much quieter at slower speeds, when tire noise is minimal.
Where I am (Manhattan) its truck noise. Trucks are the absolute worst in terms of noise pollution and emissions. Most modern cars/taxis around here are some sort of hybrid which shuts the engine when stopped, yet trucks are still in the stone age. And to top it off, there's really no political willpower to reign in bad trucker behavior.
I dunno about the US but everyone I known in Europe that lives in a city or close to a highway is looking forward to the electric future. This has become a recurring topic in dinner conversations as more and more people have first hand experience with electric vehicles now.
Imagine how quiet a city like Paris, Rome or Berlin could be if all vehicles were electric?
I can't wait for this future to arrive and the fact that I will enjoy it a decade earlier -- at least -- I'll owe to Musk/Tesla. More power to them.
I'm sad to say that except for trucks the majority of noises from highways these days is from tires. I read a rather long article, in the Atlantic I believe. Apparently car weights have been on the rise for 70 years and on top of that the trend for the same weight car is for wider tires. The increasing noise has been a constant pain for highway planners because population density is increasing, traffic is increasing, and noise per car is increasing. Technology for noise abatement is improving, but expensive.
Given that Tesla cars and anything with similar range is likely to be another 1000 pounds heavier than cars in it's class, the prospect for quieter cars is poor.
Stand on a sidewalk sometime and listen. At constant speed or slowing down electric cars vs normal cars are pretty similar, but be careful to compare cars of similar vintage. This is part of the way I think legislation that add noise to electric cars for safety is misguided. Compare a 2018 BMW, Lexus, Acura, and MB vs a Tesla. Any of them could easily hit you before you easily hear them.
After living next to commuter rail and bus stops, I’m amazed that private car noise is even a complaint. A train horn is felt in your chest. Air brakes and audible announcements are much more noticeable because they’re intermittent where tire noise is a constant hum easily tuned out.
Highway noise is mostly tire and wind noise, aside from the occasional loud engine. EVs will certainly reduce city street noise, but I'd bet highways will still be pretty loud.
Can someone explain to me how EV's can scale in older urban residential areas (most european cities) where cars are typically parked on the street (i.e. no private parking spaces)?
I just can't see how the logistics of charging would work for more than a few EVs per city block...
1) People who live in urban residential areas in Europe don't typically drive very far on a daily basis. So charging doesn't have to be as common a thing as it is in the US.
2) Charging stations at work places. I don't know the numbers, but I would assume a decent percentage of Europeans who drive to work have a parking lot at their jobsite.
3) Highway rest stops. The "travel plaza" type of rest stop is common in europe and could accommodate intercity travelers.
4) Battery swapping technology may help down the road.
Right now, it's not great. I say this having looked into an EV recently as an option. At the moment, my personal conclusion is that I'd need to rent a garage space, and then pay to have a charging point installed.
There are a small but growing number of street chargers available, albeit owned by different groups (presumably with rules and different payment routes) and with different changing and connection specifications. [1]
And of course, even if you're lucky enough to live fairly near a charging point, this doesn't make an EV comparable to an ICE car - as you then have the hassle/worry of finding a charging point, leaving your car where while it charges, and then presumably returning and moving it again, so as to free up the bay for someone else.
It's not insurmountable, but would take serious commitment from local government to change things significantly for street parking. I suspect it will come with time, critical mass of EVs, and some degree of homogenisation of the voltage and connector specs.
They don't need to support fast charging, 10kW AC would be more than enough when people charge overnight, and low power chargers like that should be pretty cheap to install at scale.
I think the real future here is when automation develops enough so these cars can drive itself to and from a parking location nearby. This will free up the space on these streets taken up by existing cars, allow more space for traffic and for stops for passengers to get in and out of vehicles.
You don't have gas pumps by street parking. Why should EVs be any different? Don't let your charge get so low that you can't make it to the nearest charging station.
I can’t remember which city or country but somewhere in Northern Europe too many people got EV too quickly for the existing charger infrastructure and they has to counter this by taking away or reducing planned city/state subsidy for new EV and artificially slow down growth
I've seen EV charging stations at offices and supermarkets in some pretty "old" places. I could imagine seeing them in more places where you park for a while.
Is there a definition for mid-range vs luxury? I wouldn't consider a sedan that starts at $35K (with an average sale price of $60K), or an SUV that starts at $47K (over 50% higher than the median US worker's gross personal income[0]) mid-range. Both the Mercedes A-class and Audi A3 start at $32.5K even.
> And in sales they're crushing competition that have been building cars for literally a hundred years.
I don't think that's a realistic assessment of where Tesla is at as a car company. Tesla is still not very good at the actual making of cars. For example, in the last five years Tesla has had more health and safety violations in their factory than the top ten automakers in the US combined:
Volkswagen is starting its push into EVs. They'll be releasing multiple electric models across multiple brands every year from now on. Porsche, Audi, VW, Skoda, and SEAT to start. I'm sure there'll be electric Lamborghinis, Bentleys, and Bugattis eventually (if you're in the market for those):
I think Tesla's main problems are that they are a small car company with an erratic CEO, inefficient and unreliable manufacturing, and they're about to face a lot of electric car competition from one of the biggest car companies in the world.
>For example, in the last five years Tesla has had more health and safety violations in their factory than the top ten automakers in the US combined
Because Tesla manufactures all its car in California, which has far stricter rules than other states. If other manufacturers moved their production there, Tesla would rank better than the competition
>Tesla cars have among the worst reliability of any car brand
And yet, Tesla owners keep recommending their cars more than anyone else, because the car is that good. There are many things that might no be "highly reliable" (even important things, like cars) that are so great to use that you'd buy them again against the current alternatives (like a Tesla vs noisy, polluting, gas-guzzling vehicles).
>In 2018, Toyota and Volkswagen each sold over 10 million cars
So what? How many of them are EVs? One could wonder how Nokia's sales were going when the iPhone started becoming mainstream…
>The Porsche and Audi engineers have to change [the Premium Platform Electric program] because Tesla’s Model 3 has gotten better than they thought.
>The e-tron as the first electric Audi is not only late. It does not reach some target values and has become far too expensive with more than two billion euros in development costs. The approximately 600,000 cars sold for the break-even are now regarded as an illusion.
>Volkswagen also wants to license its MEB electric car platform to other manufacturers. They already have one licensee
Oh, you mean the MEB platform that is being holding up until they can come up with something that is on par with Tesla tech and cost? Ah!
how again are they crushing the competition? they sell in a year what toyota manufactures in a day. a long reservation list isn’t an indicator of success, it’s an indicator of demand. and the demand, in relative scale, is low.
Rav4 Hybrid also uses some Tesla tech. While unclear if they will continue to dominate market segments they enter, Tesla has been more successful than I ha
d imagined by this point.
At least the means of production of the energy can be updated without needing to replace the car.
In an ICE, every car comes with its own power plant burning gasoline to produce energy.
With electric cars, power generation is distributed among a much, much smaller amount of power plants. Upgrading those is much more expensive, but by upgrading one, you've instantly upgraded all the electric cars powered by that power plant.
Sure, many countries are still on coal. But there are other considerations as well. Cities are hotspots for emissions, and need not be. Another important point is that nitrogen byproducts form simply from the high temperatures in internal combustion engines, not just from fuel.
In the US it depends on which state you live in. The Department of Energy has the Alternative Fuels Data Center[0] that will show you national average and state by state emissions for four different types of engine.
Model Y will have Full Self-Driving capability, enabling automatic driving on city streets and highways pending regulatory approval, as well as the ability to come find you anywhere in a parking lot.
Pending regulatory approval, and also they need figure out how to make it work first.
Off the top of my head I remember similar claims being made about the summoning feature of the model S. Has it lived up to the marketing promises?
>I think we will be feature complete full self-driving this year meaning the car will be able to find you in a parking lot pick you up take you all the way to your destination
without an intervention. This year. I would say that I am certain of that, that is not a question mark.
>However people sometimes will extrapolate that to mean now it works with one hundred percent certainty we're requiring no observation perfectly. This is not the case. Once it is feature complete then you're sort of kind of the march of nines like how many nines of reliability do you want to be and then when do regulators agree that it is that that is that reliable so this feature complete post full self-driving this year with certainty.
>This is something that we control and I managed autopilot engineering directly every week in detail so I'm certain to this. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8dEYm8hzLo 10 mins in or so)
And that you can probably sleep while it drives around end 2020
But Musk never lies. I mean, I've never seen him say things that were utterly untrue to drive stoc- sees SEC crackdowns on twitter posts .....Ohhhhh, right
What if i get that regulatory approval? There is plenty of privately owned land where i could tesla all day, some with traffic lights and everything. Or perhaps this feature is "pending" far more than regulatory approval.
Tesla is using the "we're just waiting for regulatory approval"-line for years on their Autopilot page. It's there to hide how far (behind?) development on this tech is.
Seeing how many videos exist of incidents where AP misbehaves (or even actively steers the car into barriers), it seems reasonable to assume that "regulatory approval" isn't the blocking issue for releasing full self-driving. (Could they release this feature with the traditional AP requirements of human oversight?)
I assume they mean they have equipped it with the sensor and computational capacity, and motor control, required (in their analysis) to implement self-driving when the software and regulators are ready.
I was a bit shocked at the price being as low. They're putting in a Supercharger two miles away. Before today I appreciated what Musk was doing but never considered getting a Tesla. As of tonight I am reconsidering. My only unknown right now is going to be service.
Service with Tesla has been pretty good. For small things (like problems with those notorious doors) they will drive to you and fix it, even if the car is in a parking lot at work. You can schedule over text message and in the app. It's a refreshing improvement over your average luxury car dealer, who treats service as a profit center.
The issue is with parts - delays for some body parts mean your car may be sitting in the shop for MONTHS waiting for key pieces.
There are lot of reports of service being completely unresponsive, not answering calls. And people who work there are saying stuff like "you wouldn't believe how large our backlog is" or "I used to do an equivalent of 2 jobs, now I'll have to do 3" (not exact quotes, from my memory). The reason for this is obvious, Tesla has a cash problem.
I'm in So Cal. My S got backed into - repair of quarter and door panels took about 6 weeks.
For annual service and repairs, it's been pleasant for me. Granted, it takes a while to get the appointment now, but they've always given me a loaner that's often nicer/newer than mine (or $700 Lyft credit one time), so I haven't minded delays. Mobile service has also been great, responsive and very convenient.
Contrast that to the Mercedes dealership. Every time we take in our warrantied SUV, I feel like they're trying to take us for every penny they can - very unpleasant.
Supercharging does measurable damage to batteries. If you're on a long distance road trip and need to use it, okay, but if you regularly supercharge your car WILL have poorer battery condition by the time it reaches 80,000 to 100,000 miles.
This is not a problem for most owners who charge overnight at home.
The battery chemistry and heating / high amperage damage issues are unavoidable with current lithium ion chemistry.
I don't think you will find this information anywhere on Tesla's website. It's kind of bullshit in my opinion that they don't have at least a medium sized disclaimer saying "hey, don't supercharge all the time... or this will happen". I'm sure it's buried deep in the sales contract terms and conditions.
Anytime a li-ion battery is charging, discharging, or even just sitting there the chemistry is breaking down slowly. Charging at higher speeds, charging at higher temperatures, etc. all speed up that break down.
> Supercharging does measurable damage to batteries.
However, I'm calling bullshit on this statement, unless by "measurable" you mean you will maybe lose 1% more battery capacity (which would be maybe 3 miles of range) than someone who coddled their battery. Measurable? Barely. Meaningful? Not really.
My Model S is 5 years old and at 80,000 miles, and I supercharge regularly. My battery has gone from 265 miles to 260, which is inline with what is expected.
I supercharged an S a few times and noticed that you could throttle the charging if you want. Seems reasonable to balance changing rate with how much time you have. For similar reasons I recommend avoiding the natural inclination to get the more powerful charger possible at home.
I don't think there's real-world data showing that supercharging within the limits Tesla has programmed leads to very significant degradation.
Yes, it will happen, but then there are several factors that can affect battery degradation. If you don't care, it's not so bad that you're going to ruin your car. If you do care, it's like 5min Googling to find tips on how to care for your battery.
Since when is $48k considered a "low" new car price? That's a lot of money for a car. Only a small fraction of the population is willing to spend that much.
It is hard to describe exactly the niches they are trying to fill with the designs. I don't see the Y suddenly appealing to someone who didn't already want an X or Y or 3. The differences between models borders on what other companies would consider trim levels.
They are only cannibalizing the same market, as opposed to producing a pickup or a hatchback or a van on the same chassis. Are they limited by tech or capital? Or are they really attached to an idea of what a perfect car is and have trouble extending the vision?
Tesla is just being sensible here, given the dynamics of the car market.
Point 1 - the car market is shifting heavily to sell more SUVs. (For some reason) buyers are preferring them to traditional saloons. [1]
Point 2 - as a result, many car manufacturers have a range of SUVs, which absolutely cross over with --and cannibalise-- their saloon options. For example:
* Audi has the Q3, Q5, Q7, and Q8
* BMW has the X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, and X7
* Mercedes has the GLA, GLC, GLE, GLE coupe, and GLS
All of these are SUVs, and all of them cross over with other (saloon) models from the manufacturer.
If Tesla wants to sell more Model 3-sized cars to consumers, it needs a small SUV alongside the Model 3. This is just good basic sense, on their part.
I have a 2004 Forester XT which is fast (beat all 3 $40k sports cars reviewed in the same magazine in 0-60 times), handles great (for a SUV), and has enough cargo space to be quite functional. The AWD system is great in the snow, and it has enough clearance to handle even pretty serious storms... (assuming plows are going anyway).
Sadly Subaru has abandoned the fast, but practical market. No WRX hatch, no turbo Forester, and the Crosstrek is very slow. The CVT is horrid as well.
Model 3 is small, low, and fast. Great as a second car, but not something I'd want as the primary car for a family + dog. I would not want to cross the Sierras in a snow storm with under 6" of clearance.
So the model Y fixes all my issues with the 3. A bit larger (smaller than an X though), a bit more clearance (by the looks anyways), and has generous cargo room. All while being as easy to park/drive as the smaller cars like the model 3.
I'd like something roughly the size and price of a Model 3, but with a bit more storage space. I'm never going to buy a Model X unless I find myself suddenly wealthy or a used one comes up for sale remarkably cheap. I think this makes a lot of sense.
> Or are they really attached to an idea of what a perfect car is and have trouble extending the vision?
A problem is batteries.
You can make an ICE van or light pickup on a car frame, with different gearing and a bigger gas tank, trading acceleration and top speed (which no one ever reaches in most cars in practical use) for utility, and it's not a big deal because of the energy density of gasoline, and because neither the body nor the gas tank is all that expensive.
With a Tesla, what you have to scale up to keep useful range is the batteries.
Another problem is brand image necessary for the viable price point; a hatchback would probably be doable, but hatchback and luxury aren't things that necessarily fit well together (they aren't I possible for brands that have the association with luxury firmly established, but with Tesla already getting plenty of fit+finish flack, why do something that reinforces a pedestrian rather than luxury image?
Aerodynamics are also probably a significant issue: the design of Tesla vehicles, including the SUVs, look like they are staying very close to aerodynamic ideal, which makes sense because their is a notable effect on efficiency and hence range; this has been common with EVs back to the EV1 era. This gets back to the battery issue.
I'm sure that's why they're trying to dig a more visible trench between the two levels by removing the jump seats and lower cost versions of the model S. They seem to want a sedan and an SUV, with a premium luxury version they can push new semi-experimental technology into that hasn't yet been proven in the industry as sustainable at scale, and then the more accessible models that leverage economies of scale from the successful bits of the higher end vehicles.
I guarantee that once the big rig version is making money, they're going to start making the smaller inner-city delivery vehicles using similar tech.
The same people who are saying Tesla are cannibalising the same market, are often the same people who are saying that there is significant competition from other car makers incoming ...
As someone who will be buying an EV in the next two years, the Y has certainly kept me interested in Tesla. It looks much better than the 3.
From day 1 (elon's "underpants plan"), Tesla's what-to-build-next strategy has focused around a few pieces: (1) The current and near future cost of a long range battery (2) Market size at various price points. (3) Using unit volume to drive battery cost reduction and open up new categories.
Mostly, they've selected the highest volume categories where their electrics compare favourably on price performance (and performance-performance) with high-ish-end ICE cars.
For the first car, this meant expensive sports car. Then, luxury sedan...
ATM, the $40k-$50k price range is the highest volume price segment where you can afford a good battery without performance or range compromises. At that price range, SUVs of various sizes are very popular. So, even small-ish differences in price and/or product opens up a bigger potential customer base.
Base model prices including destination charges without gas savings discounted.
Tesla Model 3 - $31450 right now after CA + Fed rebate
Tesla Model Y - $48200 likely no rebate available at release
Tesla Model Y premium over 3 = $16,750
Keep in mind the Model Y also includes the premium interior features which cost an additional $3500 to get by upgrading to the Model 3 mid range, bringing the premium over the 3 to $13,250. The Model Y also gets 80 miles of additional range over the base Model 3.
The base Model Y (RWD long range) is comparable in features and performance to the RWD long range Model 3. When you compare those two, it's only a 4K price differential (47K vs 43K). It's a bit misleading to say the Model Y has a 13K premium over the 3; that's only true if you compare two cars with drastically different feature packages.
You're forgetting the tax credits on the Model 3, which probably won't exist when the Model Y is released. This is also an important factor for the future because the price of the Model 3 will likely be lowered as the credits expire.
It also doesn’t include any of the autopilot features. Add $3,000 for the basics, $8,000 for full. And $4,000 for AWD. Oh, and $1,500 if you want anything but black. (All the same prices for the 3, but still something to consider.)
Solar Roof is form over function. It doesn't seem to deliver as much electricity as a regular solar panel, it costs tens of thousands of dollars more, and generates less electricity.
IMO, Tesla should just quit the Solar Roof project. Just keep it to regular solar panels.
One of the items listed is your car finding you in a parking lot. I gotta day... I really don’t want to get hit by a self-driving Tesla in a parking lot.
Having experienced some of the auto-pilot issues first hand... I have serious doubts about this one.
They won't get that for a long time. Autopilot is a driver assist feature. The step to "the driver doesn't have to pay attention/be present" is gigantic, and I'm not holding my breath until Tesla will get that right.
Humans aren't perfect but the rate of incident for human drivers is surprisingly low, it is well below 1% of all miles driven. Tesla wouldn't even remotely come close to achieving human level safety.
Readit News
Looking forward to seeing this company continue to thrive.
And why should Tesla get the credit for making green cars a thing? True credit belongs to Toyota for introducing the Prius 2 decades ago when gas was king and getting consumers to see alternative engines as viable options, and to California for its green vehicles incentives for making possible the financial structure that has kept Tesla alive.
Repeatedly fail to execute? They've successfully rolled out several wildly popular fully electric cars. They've succeeded in making electric cars cool.
> And why should Tesla get the credit for making green cars a thing? True credit belongs to Toyota for introducing the Prius 2 decades ago when gas was king and getting consumers to see alternative engines as viable options, and to California for its green vehicles incentives for making possible the financial structure that has kept Tesla alive.
Toyota succeeded on one side of the equation: Creating the first commercially successful eco-car. Tesla succeeded in making them cool, and appealing to people who like cars. You need both of these things if you want to actually replace gas-powered cars.
Well, you've awkwardly expanded the wording to make this criticism work. People give Tesla credit for making _electric_ cars a thing.
Curious to see why you think credit goes to Toyota, instead of Tesla?
[1] https://www.tesla.com/about
I think the eye brow around the criticism is people creating a straw man to knock down.
Tesla doesn't ask for credit and only seems to celebrate the successes which are big wins for all of us regardless of whether we buy their cars or not.
If the critique is that they miss production goals, then the defense is that hey are doing remarkably well for any company attempting to overcome these challenges.
If the critique is that _because_ they are missing production goals they don't deserve praise then well....they didn't ask for praise for it so folks can just keep it and move along.
And then they need to start all over with Model Y. What quality expectations are there?
(I know 2 dozen people with 3s purchased in the last 8 months and none of them have had any quality issues)
FYI, Tesla doesn't really do "versions" like v2. They're always trying to improve "sw/hw issues, trim quality, gaps etc" over time. So those issues will get better over time without ever announcing a "v2".
And yes, I'm sure the first Model Ys will also have issues that should improve over time.
2. the good way is to build mass transit and radically change society, which is a political issue. tesla comes in a long tradition of sucking public funding into a private entity which cuts across that
3. additionally tesla propagandizes against the above
4. elon musk is a colossal dipshit
so that is mostly why I criticize them.
Study transportation needs of people and you will discover that mass transit only fulfill some parts of people's mobility needs.
Study: https://micromobility.io
This may have been a poor way to say it, but it is the truth.
We will not buy or consume our way out of climate change or negative externalities that affect the environment.
> 2. the good way is to build mass transit and radically change society, which is a political issue. tesla comes in a long tradition of sucking public funding into a private entity which cuts across that
Again, a poor choice of words for an otherwise good point: if we want to see a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, we need to move away from the idea of ubiquitous transportation via personal vehicles.
I don't understand how people can simultaneously hold this belief and then act surprised when others criticize the "green movement" as just an excuse to control people.
Modern personal transportation is one of the ultimate expressions of individual freedom. We're making it cleaner, we're reducing externalities, and still environmentalists want to herd people onto busses and trains.
How about no?
We can do a lot to encourage people to live closer together by ending subsidies, removing zoning laws, etc. But in the end we still need farmers and other professions living spread out across the country. We can't achieve perfect urbanization. And given that electric cars are going to be a necessary part of getting to zero emissions.
In less than a decade they've gone from one highly niche electric supercar to a luxury sedan, a luxury SUV, a mid-range sedan, and a mid-range SUV.
And in sales they're crushing competition that have been building cars for literally a hundred years.
So excited for the zero-exhaust future.
Imagine how quiet a city like Paris, Rome or Berlin could be if all vehicles were electric?
I can't wait for this future to arrive and the fact that I will enjoy it a decade earlier -- at least -- I'll owe to Musk/Tesla. More power to them.
Given that Tesla cars and anything with similar range is likely to be another 1000 pounds heavier than cars in it's class, the prospect for quieter cars is poor.
Stand on a sidewalk sometime and listen. At constant speed or slowing down electric cars vs normal cars are pretty similar, but be careful to compare cars of similar vintage. This is part of the way I think legislation that add noise to electric cars for safety is misguided. Compare a 2018 BMW, Lexus, Acura, and MB vs a Tesla. Any of them could easily hit you before you easily hear them.
Deleted Comment
I just can't see how the logistics of charging would work for more than a few EVs per city block...
1) People who live in urban residential areas in Europe don't typically drive very far on a daily basis. So charging doesn't have to be as common a thing as it is in the US.
2) Charging stations at work places. I don't know the numbers, but I would assume a decent percentage of Europeans who drive to work have a parking lot at their jobsite.
3) Highway rest stops. The "travel plaza" type of rest stop is common in europe and could accommodate intercity travelers.
4) Battery swapping technology may help down the road.
There are a small but growing number of street chargers available, albeit owned by different groups (presumably with rules and different payment routes) and with different changing and connection specifications. [1]
And of course, even if you're lucky enough to live fairly near a charging point, this doesn't make an EV comparable to an ICE car - as you then have the hassle/worry of finding a charging point, leaving your car where while it charges, and then presumably returning and moving it again, so as to free up the bay for someone else.
It's not insurmountable, but would take serious commitment from local government to change things significantly for street parking. I suspect it will come with time, critical mass of EVs, and some degree of homogenisation of the voltage and connector specs.
[1] https://www.plugshare.com
They don't need to support fast charging, 10kW AC would be more than enough when people charge overnight, and low power chargers like that should be pretty cheap to install at scale.
Can’t find the article atm
Is there a definition for mid-range vs luxury? I wouldn't consider a sedan that starts at $35K (with an average sale price of $60K), or an SUV that starts at $47K (over 50% higher than the median US worker's gross personal income[0]) mid-range. Both the Mercedes A-class and Audi A3 start at $32.5K even.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_income_in_the_United_...
I don't think that's a realistic assessment of where Tesla is at as a car company. Tesla is still not very good at the actual making of cars. For example, in the last five years Tesla has had more health and safety violations in their factory than the top ten automakers in the US combined:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alanohnsman/2019/03/01/tesla-sa...
Tesla cars have among the worst reliability of any car brand:
https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/20...
https://www.truedelta.com/car-reliability-by-brand
Consumer Reports no longer recommends the Model 3 due to its lack of reliability:
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisf...
In 2018, Toyota and Volkswagen each sold over 10 million cars:
https://www.autoblog.com/2019/01/11/vw-group-2018-total-sale...
Whereas Tesla has sold about 550,000 cars in 11 years:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla,_Inc.#Sales
Volkswagen is starting its push into EVs. They'll be releasing multiple electric models across multiple brands every year from now on. Porsche, Audi, VW, Skoda, and SEAT to start. I'm sure there'll be electric Lamborghinis, Bentleys, and Bugattis eventually (if you're in the market for those):
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-electric-insig...
Volkswagen also wants to license its MEB electric car platform to other manufacturers. They already have one licensee:
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/03/05/volkswagen-wants-to-sha...
I think Tesla's main problems are that they are a small car company with an erratic CEO, inefficient and unreliable manufacturing, and they're about to face a lot of electric car competition from one of the biggest car companies in the world.
>For example, in the last five years Tesla has had more health and safety violations in their factory than the top ten automakers in the US combined
Because Tesla manufactures all its car in California, which has far stricter rules than other states. If other manufacturers moved their production there, Tesla would rank better than the competition
>Tesla cars have among the worst reliability of any car brand
And yet, Tesla owners keep recommending their cars more than anyone else, because the car is that good. There are many things that might no be "highly reliable" (even important things, like cars) that are so great to use that you'd buy them again against the current alternatives (like a Tesla vs noisy, polluting, gas-guzzling vehicles).
>In 2018, Toyota and Volkswagen each sold over 10 million cars
So what? How many of them are EVs? One could wonder how Nokia's sales were going when the iPhone started becoming mainstream…
>Volkswagen is starting its push into EVs.
They've been starting since 2009.
>Porsche, Audi, VW, Skoda, and SEAT to start
And yet, we just learned (no later than last month) that they are changing all their EV plan because their future models cannot compete with the current Model 3 (source: https://www.manager-magazin.de/premium/audi-bram-schot-will-...)
Two quotes from this article:
>The Porsche and Audi engineers have to change [the Premium Platform Electric program] because Tesla’s Model 3 has gotten better than they thought.
>The e-tron as the first electric Audi is not only late. It does not reach some target values and has become far too expensive with more than two billion euros in development costs. The approximately 600,000 cars sold for the break-even are now regarded as an illusion.
>Volkswagen also wants to license its MEB electric car platform to other manufacturers. They already have one licensee
Oh, you mean the MEB platform that is being holding up until they can come up with something that is on par with Tesla tech and cost? Ah!
Rav4 Hybrid also uses some Tesla tech. While unclear if they will continue to dominate market segments they enter, Tesla has been more successful than I ha d imagined by this point.
You're off by more than an order of magnitude.
Tesla sold 250k cars in 2018, and Toyota makes < 25k/day.
Not to mention the Tesla number is growing substantially, while the Toyota number is flat.
Deleted Comment
Is it zero exhaust? Where do you get your energy from? Is it from a caol plant? A nuclear plant? Its more you don't see the exhaust.
In the medium/long term, the trend is towards renewable energy power.
In the short-term, these cars, whether running on renewable or dirt-power, mean that we, and our children, don't have to suck up exhaust fumes.
"Thank you" are the words you're looking for.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/24/climate/how-e...
In an ICE, every car comes with its own power plant burning gasoline to produce energy.
With electric cars, power generation is distributed among a much, much smaller amount of power plants. Upgrading those is much more expensive, but by upgrading one, you've instantly upgraded all the electric cars powered by that power plant.
Sure, many countries are still on coal. But there are other considerations as well. Cities are hotspots for emissions, and need not be. Another important point is that nitrogen byproducts form simply from the high temperatures in internal combustion engines, not just from fuel.
[0] https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html
edit: grammer
I can only hope we spin up more nuclear.
Pending regulatory approval, and also they need figure out how to make it work first.
Off the top of my head I remember similar claims being made about the summoning feature of the model S. Has it lived up to the marketing promises?
>I think we will be feature complete full self-driving this year meaning the car will be able to find you in a parking lot pick you up take you all the way to your destination without an intervention. This year. I would say that I am certain of that, that is not a question mark.
>However people sometimes will extrapolate that to mean now it works with one hundred percent certainty we're requiring no observation perfectly. This is not the case. Once it is feature complete then you're sort of kind of the march of nines like how many nines of reliability do you want to be and then when do regulators agree that it is that that is that reliable so this feature complete post full self-driving this year with certainty.
>This is something that we control and I managed autopilot engineering directly every week in detail so I'm certain to this. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8dEYm8hzLo 10 mins in or so)
And that you can probably sleep while it drives around end 2020
Seeing how many videos exist of incidents where AP misbehaves (or even actively steers the car into barriers), it seems reasonable to assume that "regulatory approval" isn't the blocking issue for releasing full self-driving. (Could they release this feature with the traditional AP requirements of human oversight?)
The issue is with parts - delays for some body parts mean your car may be sitting in the shop for MONTHS waiting for key pieces.
For annual service and repairs, it's been pleasant for me. Granted, it takes a while to get the appointment now, but they've always given me a loaner that's often nicer/newer than mine (or $700 Lyft credit one time), so I haven't minded delays. Mobile service has also been great, responsive and very convenient.
Contrast that to the Mercedes dealership. Every time we take in our warrantied SUV, I feel like they're trying to take us for every penny they can - very unpleasant.
This is not a problem for most owners who charge overnight at home.
The battery chemistry and heating / high amperage damage issues are unavoidable with current lithium ion chemistry.
https://electrek.co/2017/05/07/tesla-limits-supercharging-sp...
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/07/09/tesla-limiting-supercha...
I don't think you will find this information anywhere on Tesla's website. It's kind of bullshit in my opinion that they don't have at least a medium sized disclaimer saying "hey, don't supercharge all the time... or this will happen". I'm sure it's buried deep in the sales contract terms and conditions.
Anytime a li-ion battery is charging, discharging, or even just sitting there the chemistry is breaking down slowly. Charging at higher speeds, charging at higher temperatures, etc. all speed up that break down.
> Supercharging does measurable damage to batteries.
However, I'm calling bullshit on this statement, unless by "measurable" you mean you will maybe lose 1% more battery capacity (which would be maybe 3 miles of range) than someone who coddled their battery. Measurable? Barely. Meaningful? Not really.
My Model S is 5 years old and at 80,000 miles, and I supercharge regularly. My battery has gone from 265 miles to 260, which is inline with what is expected.
Yes, it will happen, but then there are several factors that can affect battery degradation. If you don't care, it's not so bad that you're going to ruin your car. If you do care, it's like 5min Googling to find tips on how to care for your battery.
They are only cannibalizing the same market, as opposed to producing a pickup or a hatchback or a van on the same chassis. Are they limited by tech or capital? Or are they really attached to an idea of what a perfect car is and have trouble extending the vision?
Point 1 - the car market is shifting heavily to sell more SUVs. (For some reason) buyers are preferring them to traditional saloons. [1]
Point 2 - as a result, many car manufacturers have a range of SUVs, which absolutely cross over with --and cannibalise-- their saloon options. For example:
* Audi has the Q3, Q5, Q7, and Q8
* BMW has the X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, and X7
* Mercedes has the GLA, GLC, GLE, GLE coupe, and GLS
All of these are SUVs, and all of them cross over with other (saloon) models from the manufacturer.
If Tesla wants to sell more Model 3-sized cars to consumers, it needs a small SUV alongside the Model 3. This is just good basic sense, on their part.
[1] https://qz.com/1344537/by-2020-suvs-could-make-up-50-of-us-c...
Sadly Subaru has abandoned the fast, but practical market. No WRX hatch, no turbo Forester, and the Crosstrek is very slow. The CVT is horrid as well.
Model 3 is small, low, and fast. Great as a second car, but not something I'd want as the primary car for a family + dog. I would not want to cross the Sierras in a snow storm with under 6" of clearance.
So the model Y fixes all my issues with the 3. A bit larger (smaller than an X though), a bit more clearance (by the looks anyways), and has generous cargo room. All while being as easy to park/drive as the smaller cars like the model 3.
Not a real off-road park, but one of those loops the manufacturers put together, for cars like the Honda Pilot or the non-Wrangler Jeeps.
A problem is batteries.
You can make an ICE van or light pickup on a car frame, with different gearing and a bigger gas tank, trading acceleration and top speed (which no one ever reaches in most cars in practical use) for utility, and it's not a big deal because of the energy density of gasoline, and because neither the body nor the gas tank is all that expensive.
With a Tesla, what you have to scale up to keep useful range is the batteries.
Another problem is brand image necessary for the viable price point; a hatchback would probably be doable, but hatchback and luxury aren't things that necessarily fit well together (they aren't I possible for brands that have the association with luxury firmly established, but with Tesla already getting plenty of fit+finish flack, why do something that reinforces a pedestrian rather than luxury image?
Aerodynamics are also probably a significant issue: the design of Tesla vehicles, including the SUVs, look like they are staying very close to aerodynamic ideal, which makes sense because their is a notable effect on efficiency and hence range; this has been common with EVs back to the EV1 era. This gets back to the battery issue.
I guarantee that once the big rig version is making money, they're going to start making the smaller inner-city delivery vehicles using similar tech.
Tesla is limited by capital at the very least.
I highly recommend the Tesla episode of the "acquired" podcast: https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/2018/7/16/season-3-episode-...
As someone who will be buying an EV in the next two years, the Y has certainly kept me interested in Tesla. It looks much better than the 3.
From day 1 (elon's "underpants plan"), Tesla's what-to-build-next strategy has focused around a few pieces: (1) The current and near future cost of a long range battery (2) Market size at various price points. (3) Using unit volume to drive battery cost reduction and open up new categories.
Mostly, they've selected the highest volume categories where their electrics compare favourably on price performance (and performance-performance) with high-ish-end ICE cars.
For the first car, this meant expensive sports car. Then, luxury sedan...
ATM, the $40k-$50k price range is the highest volume price segment where you can afford a good battery without performance or range compromises. At that price range, SUVs of various sizes are very popular. So, even small-ish differences in price and/or product opens up a bigger potential customer base.
Also, it’s not canabilizing if the margins on the Y are substantially higher.
The Model X, Model 3, and Model Y all have continuously sloping roofline to the rear edge; all are fastbacks.
The Y is more aimed at middle-class soccer moms IMHO.
Dead Comment
Tesla Model 3 - $31450 right now after CA + Fed rebate
Tesla Model Y - $48200 likely no rebate available at release
Tesla Model Y premium over 3 = $16,750
Keep in mind the Model Y also includes the premium interior features which cost an additional $3500 to get by upgrading to the Model 3 mid range, bringing the premium over the 3 to $13,250. The Model Y also gets 80 miles of additional range over the base Model 3.
Power supply is a big problem as the state owned utility Eskom is very unreliable. We have "load shedding" at least every week at the moment.
Yesterday the power was down from about 08h00 to 12h30.
IMO, Tesla should just quit the Solar Roof project. Just keep it to regular solar panels.
Dead Comment
One of the items listed is your car finding you in a parking lot. I gotta day... I really don’t want to get hit by a self-driving Tesla in a parking lot.
Having experienced some of the auto-pilot issues first hand... I have serious doubts about this one.
They won't get that for a long time. Autopilot is a driver assist feature. The step to "the driver doesn't have to pay attention/be present" is gigantic, and I'm not holding my breath until Tesla will get that right.