3 ms·
I could think of few: - better acceleration than other cars (this a bit encourages people tho show it off) - autopilot which is still in beta, it works most o
by takeda 9y ago
I could think of few:
- better acceleration than other cars (this a bit encourages people tho show it off)
- autopilot which is still in beta, it works most of the time, which is a bit dangerous because people get used to it and reduce their attention, which is dangerous when it fails[1]
- autoparking similar as autopilot, it works but once in a while can make a mistake
The repairs are also expensive, my friend recently purchased model S and when he was parking he judged distance poorly and went too far hitting a parked truck in front of him and slightly bending his bumper on the side. The repair apparently will cost $3,500. I'm guessing they want to replace whole bumper, but it still way more expensive that bumper replacement in other cars.
[1] For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6egn1z/2_days_in_a_row_ap2_has_tried_to_slam_me_into_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6egn1z/2_days_...
- akira2501 9y agocombined with: - people not familiar with how rear wheel drive cars are different from front wheel drive cars. - people not familiar with how a vehicle that has a near 50/50 spread of weight between the front and rear axle is different from a more standard vehicle.
- semi-extrinsic 9y ago> "In a front wheel drive car, you understeer, crash into a tree and you die. In a rear-wheel drive car, you oversteer, spin around, crash into a tree and you die. In the rear-wheel drive car, you don't see the tree that kills you." But if what you say is true, Mercedes, BMW, Audi etc. should be in the same boat, and TFA indicates they're not.
- sk5t 9y agoAt least in North America, I'll wager the majority of new MB (4matic), BMW (Xdrive), and especially Audi (Quattro) vehicles are not rear-wheel drive. Most of the Audis nevertheless understeer, though...
- taneq 9y agoThe above quote is precisely why powerful RWD vehicles are designed with mild understeer and more weight at the front. Put them in the hands of a novice and (a) they're more likely to hit things head-on, where airbags and crumple zones can protect the occupants, than side on, and (b) when they do start to oversteer it's more predictable and manageable.
- briandear 9y agoMaybe car licenses should have type ratings like airplane licenses -- to drive/insure a specific class of vehicle, one ought to have training in that type of vehicle with an instructor. One can't have a commercial pilot license and start flying turbine aircraft without being checked out/endorsed for the specific aircraft type. Type endorsements make sense to me: SUVs over a certain weight, vans, high performance cars -- they all have vastly different drive characteristics and thus a "normal" driver experienced with a Ford Focus can't necessary be guaranteed to have the same competence with a high performance car just because they have a driver's license. Perhaps insurance companies could intoduce a voluntary type rating system to provide discounts for those "checked out" in specific vehicle types. It would make the roads safer and insurance cheaper.
- sokoloff 9y ago>One can't have a commercial pilot license and start flying turbine aircraft without being checked out/endorsed for the specific aircraft type. For turboprops, you mostly can (up to 12500# MTOW). With my Airplane-Single Engine, Land rating and complex endorsement, I can hop out of a Bonanza and into a TBM with no further FAA-required training or checkout. With my Airplane-Multiengine, Land rating, I can hop out of a Beech 58P and into a King Air (up through the BE20) with no further FAA involvement. Turbofans/turbojets do require a specific type rating.