Comfy

I thought only Xs do the dance.

#1 STUNNA

AZuser

Whoa!!!

And you're still not sure about getting a Tesla? Dude, this should have clinched the deal. What are you waiting for?

SamDoe1

They're the only ones that open and close the doors and stuff. My car got this update on Friday but I've been out of town so can't try it out yet. Will try tomorrow.

Also, it apparently projects stuff with the matrix headlights so that'll be cool to see.

Legend2TL

One way to fix Tesla S with a bad battery, Stunna don't watch this can not be unseen.

pttl

#1 STUNNA

It was for @Whiskers he likes the light show update

Here's the software on github if you want to make your own

https://github.com/teslamotors/light-show

Whiskers

you can download the files in some places too

Comfy

Its as awesome as the dude who cuts his Mercedes in half during a divorce battle.

#1 STUNNA

The less efficient an EV is the bigger the battery has to be. Bigger battery is more cost, weight, and likely less profitable and less competitive.

Legacy Auto needs to significantly improve the core efficiency of their vehicles if they want to compete and survive

pttl

Wow look at the prices of the musk mobiles.

Comfy

I don’t think that’s a fully updated list as it doesn’t show the Lucid Air and it’s variants which apparently are more efficient than the best Teslas. Love to see all American EVs on the podium.

Comfy

https://driveteslacanada.ca/model-3/...-battery-more/

Fremont built Tesla Model 3/Y now include AMD Ryzen processor, 12V Li-Ion battery, and more [Update]

December 28, 2021 Darryn John 1 CommentShortly after being introduced in China, Tesla Model 3 and Model Y cars being built at the Fremont factory have also received a few upgrades.

In early December Tesla China started deliveries of the Performance Model Y, which included a new AMD Ryzen processor.



The top-of-the-line electric SUV also came with an upgraded 12V Li-Ion battery to replace the traditional lead-acid battery.

Less than a month later and both changes have now made their way to North America, according to photos from a recent delivery shared by Teslascope.
Credit: TeslascopeCredit: TeslascopeThose weren’t the only two changes, as the cars now apparently also come with a new camera housing for the cameras on the front windshield. It is unclear at this time if there is any significance to this change, but we will likely learn more in the coming days.
Credit: TeslascopeWe have followed up with Teslascope to find out where this delivery took place. Judging by the photo of the 12V Li-Ion battery which has ice on the windshield, it didn’t take place near Fremont.

UPDATE: According to Teslascope, this Model Y was delivered in Portland, Oregon.

biker

Weird Tesla Model Y Body Spotted at Gigafactory Tesla in Flyover Video - autoevolution

SamDoe1

MachE already has a structural battery pack.

pttl

bummer. You just took away a comfy cheerleading point.

oonowindoo

MachE's structural battery pack is not Tesla's structure battery pack. It is not as aero dynamic and its AC vent locations are not ideal, not to mention the Tesla would have shorter turning radius.

SamDoe1

I'm sure the Ford design is flawed too for...reasons that the Tesla MyPillow guy said are real but couldn't quantify.

#1 STUNNA

Comfy

So it means that MachE should have a much better range than a comparable Tesla right,… wait what…?

SamDoe1

A structural battery pack doesn't mean what you think it means.

Also, range only matters if you own one. Guessing the range in the RDX is more than that of a Tesla which is why you don't have one.

Comfy

Structural battery pack extrapolates to having negative mass compared to a car with otherwise equivalent battery KW capacity. That means more range compared to non structural pack car (everything else being equal). Interesting that we have to go through it again and again.
So a car with structural battery pack having less range than another equivalent one with regular battery pack …means what. You tell me. .

#1 STUNNA

It gives you an idea of how horribly inefficient the Ford electric drivetrain is, they need a 99 kWh battery to do what the tesla does with a 75 kWh battery and no structural battery pack

That ineficiency eats into their profits, and then when you add in the savings from the tesla giga press there’s no way that Ford can compete on price with Tesla and have a sustainable profit margin. That is why Ford is limiting their production of their EV vehicles if they went all in they’d go bankrupt

SamDoe1

Do you have proof of this? In theory a structural member like a battery pack is a more efficient design but structure doesn't come for free. If you take mass out of the body and put it into the pack to make it stronger to support the load then you don't get much of a benefit lol. It's very likely that a structural pack is more for manufacturing ease than it is for weight savings and performance. Same for Tesla.

#1 STUNNA

That's not what they're doing, the battery pack is strong enough to handle the load without adding a lot of mass to it. The required structure of the battery pack secures the battery and the vehicle, which means the mass that was required to make the bottom of the vehicle rigid isn't necessary and can be removed and replaced by the battery pack, this makes the vehicle weigh less.

It's so annoying when you're so confidently wrong when the information is out there and has been posted on this forum multiple times. Here are 2 time stamped videos that have already been posted in here before that explain this

SamDoe1

Hey scooter boy, based on the bullshit you post on here that's just regurgitated garbage without any personal contribution I'm guessing that I already understand this better than you do seeing as though I do engineering for a living and don't just cruise twitter for propaganda on a car that I don't own.

Both of those videos toss in a lot of "we wills" and "potentiallys" into the mix meaning it hasn't yet been done. This shows that they don't have a final design and the real actual benefits have yet to be quantified. If this is such a fundamental thing, why didn't they do it from the get go like Ford did? The pack as it sits today is NOT designed to be structural, it's designed to sit in the body. What they describe in those videos is instead of having a structure inside of the battery to essentially hold itself up, they want to move all the cells to the middle, glue the top and bottom together like plywood, and add the structure back around the outside of the cells. This nets an improvement in space efficiency for sure because the bulk of stress will always move through the outside shell and not the inside middle bit. Additionally, they even admit that the net benefits of range and $/kWh for a structural pack vs current isn't driven by the pack design itself. For the range benefit of 54% (which is likely still BS, also 54% compared to what exactly???), the pack design only contributes 14% of that benefit. The rest comes from a variety of other things. All of this stuff you did not mention and clearly do not understand. Integral part strength is not free, optimizing the design makes it better but it's not a silver bullet. The strength has to come from somewhere so by eliminating the floor of the car, they move that strength to the battery which has to have a similar load bearing ability. In order to get that, you have to add material where necessary. There are a variety of things to aid in this (lightweight exotic materials, optimized design, etc) but it's not just a matter of taking an angle grinder to the floor and bolting in a battery.

The biggest benefit for a structural battery (or engine for that matter) is ease of manufacture and part count reduction. No matter how much you want to believe a Tesla is a race car, it's not. It's also not a commercial vehicle where every pound matters. All Teslas are heavy AF, they aren't trying real hard to reduce weight for performance, they are trying to reduce complexity for manufacturing cost purposes. The structural pack is not likely to be a whole lot lighter, it is (however) designed to be a hell of a lot simpler and easier to manufacture which is 100% the reason Ford did so right out of the gate. For them it's not BS propaganda to sell cars to idiots like you and Comfy (who aren't going to buy one anyway), it's to sell cars to the masses at a decent price with cheap manufacturing costs.

It's so annoying when you're so confidently wrong when the information is out there and has been posted on this forum multiple times.

Comfy

Looks like Sam is on a mission to prove Tesla engineering and Elon wrong. Good luck.

#1 STUNNA

I’m laughing at all the time he wasted typing it thinking I was actually going to read it

biker

Perhaps the same way some treat your posts.

SamDoe1

Tesla engineering and Elon are not wrong, everything they said is 100% correct. YOU and Scooter Boy are wrong because you have no idea of how to interpret and understand what it is they're saying just like what happens time and time again.

I'm laughing because you definitely read it and posted this because you had nothing more to say.

#1 STUNNA

#1 STUNNA

v11 could be huge…

#1 STUNNA

SSFTSX

Enjoy the show.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/t...ys-2022-01-08/
Jan 7 (Reuters) - Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk tweeted on Friday that the electric carmaker will raise the U.S. price of its advanced driver assistant software dubbed "Full Self Driving" to $12,000 on Jan. 17.

pttl

$12k, is that all?

#1 STUNNA

Instant torque ftw

SamDoe1

How does the scooter compare?

Comfy

OMG that was really close and a very risky move. Couldn’t he have slowed or stopped???

civicdrivr

iTrader: (9)

Yeah he definitely could've just...hit the brakes.

oonowindoo

hitting brakes is for losers like us. Tesla does not need brakes when "0-60 matters"