I exaggerated a little for effect, but you seem to agree that there is the attitude that Musk is a conman, Tesla is a cult, and that they’re only as successful as they are because of hype and a “reality distortion field”. Like:
Tesla fans–EV fans in general, really–find this attitude rich, since it’s the incumbents that have been pretending for years now that EVs aren’t the future. It’s pretty pathetic that some makers won’t have a long-range EV until 12 years past the original Roadster. Maybe it’s everyone *but *Musk that’s stuck in a reality-distorting bubble?
Really, all this stuff about Tesla’s terrible manufacturing and such makes the incumbents look even more like dipshits. Because if Tesla can ship an awesome product in spite of all that, then it raises even more questions about why they haven’t been clobbered yet, and why the expected clobbering is still years off.
Well, if you believe some people, it’s because it’s all fake, it’s all hype, and it doesn’t exist. Again, I don’t think Tesla’s the one with the reality distortion field here.
Anyway, I’m not proposing taking my ball and going home. Obviously, I prefer to talk about the Model 3 itself rather than the “politics”, but in the absence of other news I’ll talk about whatever.
I dunno, I think maybe AARP members aren’t their biggest target market.
I’m being mostly serious here–with streaming services both built in and available on phones, the need for FM is almost zero. Every phone has FM built into the chipset and yet virtually none enable it. Sure, some people want to listen to live sports or whatever, but it’s just not that high a priority when there are so many other options.
It’s just one tiny example, but I think it does kinda illustrate the disconnect of priorities between automakers and their target audience. Might have something to do with the zillions of articles about millennials are killing the auto industry.
Also, no one’s had the car long enough for the tires to deflate noticeably.
jz78817’s logic is impeccable. You see, his starting point is that any Tesla fan is delusional. Since Motor Trend also likes Tesla, it follows that they must be delusional. From there, we can conclude that Giulia is a rattlebox held together with duct tape and bailing wire since they liked that as well. We can finally conclude that C&D is delusional since they also liked the Giulia. It all fits!
If you don’t follow anything at all about Tesla, fine, but don’t act as if you do. The only way you could think this is if you literally haven’t followed a single thing about the Model S, like not even seeing pictures from 2012 vs. today.
YamatoTwinkie gave a nice list. It got a visual update. There’s been substantial improvements in battery capacity and performance (0-60 in the top model went from 3.9 s to 2.3 s). AWD. New interior options. Two generations of autopilot. And zillions of relatively minor mechanical improvements.
They’re probably due for a platform update in a few years. The S has been out for 5 years, which (ISTM) is about the minimum lifetime for a platform (the BMW 3 series platforms last around 8-10 years, with some overlap). So it has plenty of life left but they should probably start thinking about an update, especially if it’ll improve manufacturability.
the Giulia is a POS which broke down (multiple times) during both Motor Trend’s and Car & Driver’s road tests. They’re “buff books,” and buff books are whores who hand out awards to anything which might benefit them. They’re mostly staffed by people who don’t even own cars and subsist on a steady diet of press cars from manufacturers’ media fleets. So they give awards to cars (like sport sedans) which virtually nobody is actually buying because the vast majority of car buyers don’t read magazines like Motor Trend or Car & Driver.
Jesus dude, if you refuse to read what I write, you could at least try to remember what you wrote. You were talking about Tesla’s early days, with the Roadster and then Model S. Long before the Model 3. The Roadster was pretty low volume but the Model S was/is nicely profitable.
Wait - you just accused everyone who isn’t a loyal Tesla supporter of being the ones in a “reality distortion field?”
This is the part where I struggle to remember the name of the Internet rule that goes something like extremism and parody being indistinguishable. I can’t tel if you’re joking I’m not.
And when you talk about EV fans, I think I’m the only one in this thread who has paid money to join the BEV club (though I guess a few are PHEV buyers). Hard to see that comment not through the lens of a “true Scotsman” type of thing.
And for the comment about the Model S not changing anything, I thought it was clear that I was asking about the aesthetics, not the batteries, software or whatever. Someone else upthread informed me that in the last five years, they tweaked the grill a little. So that answers that.
I actually stand by that. Nearly all of the magic behind Tesla is Elon’s RDF. Suppose you’d designed the original iPhone, but had no ability to manufacture it at scale. That’s pretty much the current situation with Tesla.
I’ve never actually contributed anything against the product. I like the Model S. The fit and finish on the show models I’ve seen have been Chrysler-like, but overall, kind of a cool car. The technology is nice (but not special). If someone gave me one, I wouldn’t sell it for a profit. The RDF claim is about Tesla as a manufacturer, and that’s an important distinction, which I’ll mention in a moment.
But this is the thing. You invented the first iPhone (see above), but you can only supply 100 per year. That’s only “shipping” in the strictest sense, and it’s nowhere near profitable.
Okay, maybe Tesla has a few years head start in electrification (“maybe”; I’m not conceding that is true), but Ford/GM/VW/Toyota have a 100 year head start in manufacturing and delivery. What’s easier? Making up for a twelve-year gap, or a 100 year gap?
A bit of snark, but I thought the rest of my comment put it in context. Since obviously I was unclear, let me reemphasize.
On the specific points of EVs being the future, decent EVs are possible now if we put in the effort, and EVs can have very few negatives compared to the upsides, I absolutely think that existing automakers have been in denial for roughly the last decade–at least as a public policy position.
The exact attitudes have varied slightly, of course, with some at least giving Tesla credit and some (fairly recently) acknowledging that they actually have to seriously compete with Tesla at this point.
The thing is, we’re way, way past the point where this stuff should have been obvious. It was obvious to a software nerd in 2004. Hell, it was obvious to a lot of others well before then (Musk wasn’t even in the original group of Tesla founders). So it really should have been obvious to automakers before then.
Why not? Why all these halfhearted efforts, followed by an “aw shucks, I guess consumers really don’t want them after all”?
Well, I dunno, but Musk and a bunch of others saw things very clearly back then and the incumbents did not, and they’re just now catching up. Tesla has had like a decade to learn manufacturing from the ground up and they’re still not there, while the others had all that time to just get serious about EVs and build one that didn’t suck.
If “reality distortion field” is going to be your excuse for the existence of Tesla fans, then perhaps it’s not unreasonable to conclude that incumbent automakers lived in an RDF of their own creation, with only the barest encroachment of reality to this day.
I dunno, but we’ll find out in the next year. If Tesla ships a few hundred thousand Model 3’s in the next year, and don’t have to sell them at a loss, then I think we can say they’ve caught up. Sure, still not quite GM or Toyota scale, but they’re playing with the big boys. If not, then they’ll be in rough shape.
I still don’t see any real competition on the horizon until 2019. Tesla still has a bit of wiggle room left, but not a ton.
Cite the Model S is very profitable. It has the sales numbers of a low volume luxury car such as the Corvette. It’s hardly going to carry the company.
It was possible 5 years ago. They didn’t think it would make money. Again, they already ran a trial balloon out with the EV1 and followed it up with the Volt.
What technology was invented by either company to build any of these cars?
again, cite the profitability of Tesla. It’s profit is currently measured in loss per share.
it’s not a few months of production, it’s 5 months of costly near-zero production with another 4 months predicted by Musk.
No, it’s not selling pretty well. You’ve had to move the bar down significantly so the Model S looks good. A car selling well would be a Camry which has already sold over 280 thousand.
If Tesla survives the current negative cash flow and they don’t continue to lose their fan-base due to delays then they might generate a profit. Good on them if they do.
Oh really? Please, “Dr. Strangelove,” please regale me with what knowledge and experience you have which would convince me that people who have been mass-producing cars for 100+ years are “dipshits.” Please, “Dr. Strangelove,” enlighten me with all your industry experience.
Because last I checked, those “dipshit” incumbents crank out 14-18 million vehicles a year while Tesla is still trying to figure out how to weld together a few hundred bodies a month.
The only “dipshit” here is the company who thought they were smarter than everyone else yet is mired right now in “production hell” trying to figure out how to do something my great-grandparents could do blindfolded.’
let me put a fine point on it, lest you accuse me of buiding a strawman or something: the problems Tesla is having right now have absolutely nothing to do with their cars being EVs. it has everything to do with them being incredibly arrogant and having no discipline. and you have the bald-faced nerve to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as “having an ‘anti-Tesla’ agenda.”
You said “software” specifically. You’re lumping batteries “or whatever” in the same category?
The Model S got a major drivetrain upgrade over the years. It’s the “moral equivalent” of adding a turbocharger or an 8-speed DCT. Or a second engine, in point of fact.
I’m actually kinda astonished at how little emphasis batteries get in EVs, considering that they play such a central role. Automakers are only barely starting to understand that a giant battery gets you all kinds of positive effects, such as a huge amount of power, regeneration capability, lifetime, amortization of systems (cooling, etc.) and of course range. It seems like they more or less get it now but it sure took a while.