Official views from manufacturers are fine, but you'll know the deficiencies only when you actually use it on your own. I'm still skeptical about the improved vision at night. My Acura reversing camera has terrible night vision capability especially if there's anther source of light behind such as a parked car, or a garage light. About the water repellent coating on the lens, how long it's going to last? Likely not for entire lifetime of the car. I'm having a hard time believing that just the outside housing of lens will keep all the spray / dirt from other vehicles/ environment out. Sure, a regular outside mirror also gets the spray and dirt, but due to the large (relative) size, we can still use it effectively (unlike any other cameras I have seen in any car so far). I'll believe it after someone (not a paid journalist) drives the car in rain at night utilizing these cameras and finds them superior to mirrors.

 

I hear you. I can tell you that the Honda lane watch system on my CTR has been working really well though. The rear cam is totally useless when it's raining or when the road is wet. But the lane watch has never failed me and I use it all the time.

The lane watch camera is more protected than the rear camera since the latter protrudes out while the lane watch one is more tucked in. Also, the spray from the car usually is at the back, as in how usually the rear of the car is way more dirty, especially for a hatchback. The body of the car would prevent the spray from getting onto the lane watch camera. And the lane watch cam actually points down a bit already.

 

https://electrek.co/2020/03/02/tesla...oon-elon-musk/

Tesla is going to deploy more Autopilot functionality quicker after a core rewrite of its system, which is coming soon, according to CEO Elon Musk.As we recently reported, Tesla is going through “a significant foundational rewrite in the Tesla Autopilot.” As part of the rewrite, Musk says that the “neural net is absorbing more and more of the problem.”

It will also include a more in-depth labeling system.

At the time, the CEO said that it was almost ready, but we haven’t seen the update just yet.

Today, Musk confirmed that the new update will enable Tesla to release more functionality quicker and that it is coming soon (via ):
“We need to finish work on Autopilot core foundation code and 3D labeling, then functionality will happen quickly. Not long now.”
The CEO added that it will “dramatically improve” Autopilot visualization.

In an update called ‘Full Self-Driving Sneak Preview’ late last year, Tesla made a series of “Driving Visualization Improvements”:
“The driving visualization can now display additional objects that include stoplights, stop signs, and select road markings. The stop signs and stoplight visualizations are not a substitute for an attentive driver and will not stop the car. To see those additional objects in your driving visualization, tap Controls > Autopilot > Full Self Driving Visualization Preview.”
However, the display of those new objects in the visualization system is not always accurate and the new 3D labeling is expected to help improve that significantly.

Musk even said that the new labeling capability should enable Tesla Autopilot to detect potholes and make mini-maps in order to remember them.

Electrek’s Take

This is encouraging.

At this point, I think Tesla owners who were promised full self-driving see the feature as so far out that it is discouraging. What they want to see is the pace of improvements accelerating to make it attainable.

 

So basically more idiots will try to take a nap while driving?

 

That's scary.

 

If you want to really nerd out on speculation of Tesla's future battery tech based on the multiple battery companies they've purchased in the last year, and what theyre likely to announce at their battery and powertrain investor day in April then these are worth watching


This explains the what


and this explains the how

 

Maxwell said that they had a 300kw/kg battery in 2017, and that they'll have a 385kw/kg in 2020








When they're able to pull off 385wh/kg battery (they will eventually) they could make a 100kwh battery whose cells weighs ~260kg, it'll use less materials than the current 75kwh, cost less and be easier to produce. Win win win. These maxwell batteries would also be safer, and run cooler. They could make a 100kwh Model 3 that'd have about a 450 miles range for less than they make a 75kwh version now. Once they get to 500wh/kg that will effectively double their gigafactories production, they'll get twice as many batteries out of the same amount of raw materials. It also cuts the costs in half.

 

I guess they'll allow switching the batteries in the existing car to the newer ones at some point (hopefully at a discount). On second thoughts, I should delay the purchase of Tesla to next 4-5 years to get the most out of it... .

 

I wouldn't bet on that

 

450miles of range? I’m intrigued.

 

not sure on the newer model S’ but weren't they built where the battery could be quickly swapped?

 

Yes the S and X were designed for that capability but they gave up on that idea, and decided to focus high speed charging instead. It would cost them a lot more to install battery swapping stations all over the country and have a stockpile of spare batteries for every make and model onsite

 

Or they make a lighter and cheaper but still 75kwh battery that gets 350mi range out of it but the car costs $40K.

I bet they probably do that, it's still a great car and at a great price and now they can make even more of them because the battery requires less raw materials. Battery production seems the be the biggest bottleneck for EV manufacturers so if you can 10% more range with 25-30% less materials, they'll probably go that route instead of using the same amount of materials to go much further. 300-350 miles is still a lot of range

 

I’d prefer at it close to 400. I just don’t want to have to think about charging often or worrying if I have enough range for some trip.

plus with where I park my car I don’t have access to an outlet so I’d be relying on charging stations.

 

The avg person drives 29mi/day so 350 miles is about two weeks worth. If you rent then you should talk to the landlord about installing EV charging, especially in SF. Tell them you're going to move if they won't accomodate you because other places will.

In the future there will be EV charging ports in parking spots everywhere and solar panels covering parking lots

 

Is that how many miles you drive in 2 weeks? Because i think can only recall 1 person fits that category... Also that is assuming all he/she does is going to work with NO fucking life outside of work.

Also good luck threatening the landlord... if i were the landlord, i would say GTFO. I do not know many places will install EV charging station just for a few people...

 

I would say, if you can't charge it at home. Dont even bother with any EV.... It is a pain in the ass and the type of hassle that you didnt even know exist with owning a car.

If you could charge at home, as i said before 250 miles or 300 miles or even 400 miles make no difference for your day to day activities. If you really need 400 miles range frequently, i doubt full EV will be on your list anyway.

 

Also 350 is assuming you charge all the time to 100%.

doesnt Tesla recommend charging to roughly 80%. That 350 range then shrinks to 280 miles.

 

You might need to cut back on the EV koolaid.

 

Your anecdote doesn't debunk a nationwide study

https://newsroom.aaa.com/2015/04/new...torists-drive/

If EVs are only for rich people why wouldn't a landlord want to attract those tenants? One months rent could cover the cost of one EV charger. So a landlord doesn't want to have any vacant space and they want their good rich tenants to stay so they accommodate their tenants needs.

EVs are taking over in the next decade or two, that's where the industry is going. So in a world where 80% of their tenants has EVs the landlord better have some charging spots if he wants to attract those people. They're going to have to install them at some point or go out of business, why not do it now. Also the landlord qualifies for a 30% tax credit if they install it this year

https://turbotax.intuit.com/tax-tips...edit/L3MRAZHho

 

Let's check back in 10-20 years

 

Because Rich people dont need a landlord?

I dont know how that study is conducted but i can tell you the average per day in CA is a lot more than 25 miles a day... shit i drive 10 miles round trip just to eat lunch.
I would assume the CA is a big chunk of Tesla's sales in the US.. if not the biggest chunk.

While we can all agree EV is the future, but your timeline is wayyyyyy off.

 

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm

here is the official data.. unless you were talking about Boomers, otherwise your # was way off.

I dont think you need to drive much when you are retired.

 

What are you talking about? What number was way off? From the study you quoted the highest mileage group drives 15,291 annually which averages to about 41 miles/ day, and the lowest mileage group about half of that. If you kinda average it out 29 miles per day is well within the range.

 

20 years is a long time man. You are too generous.
My commute is 5 miles one way. I’d be hard pressed to cross 20 miles on a good day. Yes his timeline was way off. I’d give it 5-10 years.

 

Like i said... if you want to include boomers to justify your 29 miles (25 miles) a day... sure, be my guest.

 

 

5 or 10 years?
look at these big funds. They are the biggest holders of tech stocks. Practically every one depend on Oil/Chemical business including Chinese.

https://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-ra...gn-wealth-fund

how do you think Norway could afford subsidized EV sales on such large scale. Because it was investing money from its oil sales into soverign wealth that inturns investing growth stocks of mostly tech companies.


remember Tesla cannot even make its own Maps, its own tires, it needs its microprocessors built into foreign Fabs. who inturn need laser machinery from EU which inturn money invested from Middleast funds.

Cree, Wolfspeed. EV all those related.

 

 

I think there are many people in SF who can afford a Model 3 but can't afford a home in SF.

In the next 2-3 years and EV will become cheaper than a comparable ICE vehicle, not including subsidies, lower fuel costs, and less maintenance. So why would anyone pay more for a vehicle that costs more to fuel it, and breaks down more often?

 

There's the issue - your and other's definition of comparable could be way off. After more than 20 years, only some hybrids are barely financially better than the same non-hybrid - it will be a long time before EVs become a better financial transportation solution, especially in the world of $2/gal gas.

 

A hybrid is more complex than an ICE vehicles, it's an ICE and EV combined. It has all the complexity of an ICE vehicle, plus an electric motor and battery. It'll never be cheaper than an ICE vehicle.

The drivetrain in an ICE vehicle contains 2,000+ moving parts typically, whereas the drivetrain in an EV contains around 20. The only thing keeping an EV more expensive is the battery cost. The cost of the battery has dropped almost 90% since 2010, and Tesla's battery packs are 20% cheaper than the rest of the industry, they're going to announce a significant price reduction next month. If you don't follow this closely you maybe aren't aware of how fast things are changing, EVs will follow an S curve adoption curve like all other disruptive technological advances, changes will happen on a logarithmic curve, not linear.

 

Tesla is announcing a significant price cut next month?

 

Watch out for battery day in April. It may not be price cut in tesla vehicles per se but at least make their batteries energy denser and cheaper to produce which would imply increase profit for them initially at least and / or increased range / make Cybertruck and Tesla Semi viable to market. Cheaper vehicles are for future though.

 

or they may not.

 

Yes maybe. #1 you dont need a car in SF. #2. I do not consider people who can afford a model 3RICH like you said.
How do you know if EV will become cheaper in the next 2-3 years?
i can think of 100 reasons why anyone would pick ICU cars at least for now over an EV.

#1, i can go anywhere within driving distance without even thinking about where the gas station is.
#2. I do not have to take longer route just so i can charge.
#3. Now, not only you have to drive further, the waiting time (both in line and charging) is much much longer than fueling up gas. Now, if you were right about the popularity of EV, that means there will be a lot more EVs on the road and so far i do not see much of change in charging infrastructure.
and on and on and on...

 

great counter argument there. You killed me with the facts and logic

 

We've discussed this before but you still fail to get it. 85-90% of all EV charging is done at home or at work if they have it. You rarely stop at a supercharger, there isn't usually a long line at charging stations. You hear about that in one state during Christmas and Thanksgiving. All modes of travel get stressed during the holidays. Gas stations get backed up during the holidays and when a hurricane is coming. I've never seen a charging station run out of energy like the gas stations do when a hurricane is coming. I'd rather wait for an hour to charge up an EV than to wait an hour to get gas before a hurricane only for the gas station to run out and you're left stranded. But neither of those situations are the norm and you shouldn't judge these cars based on just edge case situations

I'm not saying it's not an issue but it's an issue of which a solution has already been developed and is being implemented. Most chargers nowadays are 120kw, they're being replaced with 250kw chargers, in addition to the hundreds of new chargers being built every year. They've already open about 50 new charging stations in the US so far this year. That's not to mention the billions of dollars being spent on Electrify America, Chargepoint, EVGo and other 3rd party charging stations that are opening alongside them that a Tesla can use.

There does not need to be as many charging stations as gas stations because they will be used much less frequently than a gas station because everyone charges at home or work. Charging is usually done at the same time as something else, whether that's shopping at the grocery store, mall, or eating at a restaurant, you don't usually stop to charge an EV and do nothing else. With the new 250kw charging you can get 100 mi range in about the same amount of time it takes to fill your gas tank.

I don't hear Tesla users constantly complaining about the charging system leaving them screwed, the community is vocal about things they don't like (service, parts repair) but charging isn't one of their top concerns, only someone who's never lived day to day with an EV would think charging is this dealbreaking issue because they're still stuck in the mindset of stopping at a gas station every week or two.

 

Even though road trips to Grandma is a real thing and there’s some concern about charging infrastructure on highway journeys, it’s the fact that there are millions of condos, apartments, and townhouses in the US that don’t have the ability to charge EVs overnight (no garages) that is the real limiting factor.

I would be fine stopping for ten minutes every three hours if that was necessary on a road trip. We aren’t there yet on charging though (210-225 miles on a 10 minute charge).

That would have added 45 minutes per day for my two day drive to Colorado from DC. The dogs would have needed a break and we could have grabbed lunch or snacks for some of those stops.

But there’s no way I would do that if I thought I might encounter the lines we saw over Thanksgiving or some asshole decides to park his truck in front of the charging station to own the libs.

We still have a long way to go.

 

I'm hoping that they do a magic trick like they did with the Model Y and the base Cybertruck will launch with about a 300mi range instead of 250+mi