6 ms·

Automotive windows have been a solved problem and commodity for a while. I don't really understand the point of this demonstration, except for two possibilitie

Automotive windows have been a solved problem and commodity for a while. I don't really understand the point of this demonstration, except for two possibilities: 1. They're gaslighting the Tesla faithful with "super strong" windows that are just normal. Or 2. Demonstrating they are still wasting tons of r&d dollars on non-problems and ought to bring in an adult who can design and manufacture commodity things efficiently.

tomlong 7y ago
I think maybe the target audience for this is people with old trucks not people who know about Teslas
diffeomorphism 7y ago
Sure, but they explicitly advertised to not go for the commodity version but more durable/damage resistant ones. This is not really very new tech (bullet proof glass for VIPs, bank transporters etc.) but also not a commodity. > I don't really understand the point Congrats, you are not the target market. It is a demonstration of a feature some people want (though these peoples are wrong to want this according to your authoritative judgement).
- w0utert 7y ago
  Can you explain why 'super strong windows' is a useful feature to have? I've never owned a pickup so I wouldn't know, but do the windows regularly break or something? Never happened to any of the cars I or anyone I know ever owned. Is it against car thieves or something? Because I imagine they would find a way around this anyway. What I'm wondering about is personal safety in case of an accident (water, fire, etc). How do you get out? In some EU countries a safety hammer to break the glass in case you are trapped is actually mandatory on new cars, how does unbreakable glass deal with that? Same goes for the sharp angles by the way, as demonstrated, this design will never be road-legal in the EU because new cars are not allowed to have sharp features for pedestrian safety.
  - davedx 7y ago
    Never had a chip in your windscreen? Happens to our cars with annoying regularity here on flat well maintained Dutch roads. Imagine what happens to your windows if you regularly drive on construction sites or unpaved roads
  - diffeomorphism 7y ago
    > Can you explain why 'super strong windows' is a useful feature to have? I am also not the target market and it is not something I personally find useful. But the post I was replying to was nonsensical (I don't see why they didn't pick the commodity option -> must be gaslighting).
    - Traster 7y ago
      Your argument would be far more compelling if someone could actually tell us why exactly the target market wants extra strong windows. I might not be the target market, but if someone says "Well I have a Ford and gravel flicks up and smashes my passenger side windows" I would be able to understand. The problem is that even the people doing the demonstration didn't actually tell us why you would want stronger windows.
  - dirtyid 7y ago
    > new cars are not allowed to have sharp features for pedestrian safety Do you have more information on this. I know there's minimum radius for blunting sheet metal panel edges on the fascias that are prone to pedestrian collision. Seems pretty trivial change to smooth things out a little, though I wonder how much of the sharp edges here is value engineering vs desired aesthetic.
    - tomkarlo 7y ago
      The EU (and Japan and Australia) has a range of rules now for increasing pedestrian safety, including softer materials on the front bumper, hoods that give so that they cushion the impact if a pedestrian is hit, and limiteing sharp protrusions / edges on the front of the vehicle. The new G-wagon, for example, has turn signals that flex down into the vehicle on an impact. https://www.autonews.com/article/20120423/OEM03/304239967/european-safety-styled-cars-due-in-u-s https://www.autonews.com/article/20120423/OEM03/304239967/eu...
- maxerickson 7y ago
  Whatever glass they put in there will essentially be a commodity. They will have lots of options for getting it manufactured and so on.
  - TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
    Which affects the final price and also the mechanical requirements. Bullet-proof glass isn't an exotic item, but you're not going to find it in most consumer products.
lolc 7y ago
3. They buy phone screen protectors on Amazon and stick them on the windows to make them stronger.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  And since Amazon commingles inventory, they got a counterfeit batch.
modernerd 7y ago
3. It's a PR stunt. It invites people who don't care much for Tesla or the vehicle itself to share the video, it softens the seriousness and tension of a launch, and it helps to humanise the brand and the presenter.
- TheGallopedHigh 7y ago
  Do you bleieve they are playing that type of self-deprecating meta?
  - bil7 7y ago
    seems on brand for Mr. Musk to me.
  - mytailorisrich 7y ago
    I believe that they are PR and marketing experts. They've created a big buzz that has everyone talking about this car. "Armor glass" that completely shatters when you throw something at it by hand? Come on... Also, why would it need armor glass in the first place? They picked a gimmick that is irrelevant to the product so that this "failure" does not hurt at all.
    - 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
      If you think Tesla's PR and marketing is done by experts, please explain Musk's Thai cave rescue pedophile fiasco last year.
      - mytailorisrich 7y ago
        What has Tesla's PR team to do with Elon Musk's personal tweets? This is a very poor argument...
  - modernerd 7y ago
    Sure, it seems plausible. It's slapstick comedy applied to PR. It's either clever marketing or a happy accident. SpaceX failed launches are marketing too, but they're not stunts. They are live tests that are filmed anyway. The fact they share the video is secondary to the main goal of the tests. But this? It's a staged marketing event. It's not a test procedure. The point is to get as many people to see it as possible. Smashing the windows doesn't cost much or stop a potential buyer in their tracks. The windows break easily in a highly visible but safe way (no broken glass fragments spilling onto the stage, no projectiles bouncing back into the audience). They repeat the “demonstration” with the same “accidental” result instead of just moving on. Musk knows it's fun to watch things go wrong, and it boosts the already high newsworthiness of the event. It would have been fun to watch anyway because company founders don't tend to let people throw things at their latest vehicle on stage, but that alone wouldn't make as many headlines as an accident.
_carl_jung 7y ago
If all it takes is "an adult who can design and manufacture commodity things efficiently", it should be pretty easy to set up some competition for Tesla with a team of competent "adults", right?
- UserIsUnused 7y ago
  He is talking about a very specific issue not about telsa engineering as a whole. The issue is wasting over-engineering small irrelevant stuff that provide no real benefit. He is criticizing a part of Tesla not Tesla as a whole. A company can do many great things and can still be crap in some others.
  - _carl_jung 7y ago
    The phrasing makes it clear that this was a character attack on Elon himself, not Tesla.
- lmm 7y ago
  The hard part is finding "investors" who are happy to keep buying your bonds while you run a massive cash burn. Anyone can run a "successful" business as long as the supply of other people's money holds out.
friendlybus 7y ago
Elon sounded hurt for real. I think it just happened. They went on banging on car doors with sledgehammers that went fine, it was just one piece as part of the show around the same theme that it's a strong car.
- nikofeyn 7y ago
  yea, i believe it was for real too. they guy throwing the ball did so with much, much less force the second time.
joekrill 7y ago
"...have been a solved problem and commodity for a while" So there's absolutely no room for improvement? Should we just move on from everything that we've deemed "a solved problem and commodity"? Another possibility: they want to foster an image of a product designed to last, with very little maintenance cost. I'm not suggesting car windows are a maintenance cost, by the way - just that it adds to the overall image of reliability. Additionally, I'm not sure where you draw the line at what are "non-problems" and what exactly is and is not "wasting tons of r&d dollars". Or, as others have suggested, what constitutes a "PR stunt". Is it wasting time and resource to select Tesla-specific paints, interior designs, wheel designs? After all, every other car has those. They are "solved problems" - just do whatever the other guys are doing!
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
zubiaur 7y ago
They have close ties with AGP a company that specializes in high tech glass, the model X windshield is one of the most complex in the industry. AGP also specializes in bullet resistant glass and use many of their techniques in regular glass as well. I believe what musk said, they threw wrenches, a kitchen sink, just about Avery thing and it didn’t break. A metal ball is probably the worst case scenario. A solid ball will be very heavy, but even worse, there is only ONE point of contact. All the kinematic energy has to be stopped at ONE incredibly small point. What is the area of contact? It’s infinitesimally small! Even a bullet would have more contact area, and suffer plastic deformation. A metal sphere? Worst case scenario.
koonsolo 7y ago
Those windows are not normal. As far as I know, front windows always stay together when they break, and side windows scatter to little pieces. I understand why you would make the front window super strong. But the side windows, why can't they not scatter like in all the other cars?
- eropple 7y ago
  Automotive safety glass is usually the same in both windshields and side windows, but windshields are laminated together with plastic layers so when a front impact shatters them, they don't shred the people inside. As I understand it, the force of a (non-fatal) side impact in a car is generally less--reducing the danger of the above--and occupants need a way to escape in case of non-functioning doors, and so glass that can be broken free from the inside is the norm for cars. That looks like they laminated the side windows. I'm not sure I'd want to be in that even if it didn't have Musk's...musk...all over it.

tomlong 7y ago

I think maybe the target audience for this is people with old trucks not people who know about Teslas

diffeomorphism 7y ago

Sure, but they explicitly advertised to not go for the commodity version but more durable/damage resistant ones. This is not really very new tech (bullet proof glass for VIPs, bank transporters etc.) but also not a commodity. > I don't really understand the point Congrats, you are not the target market. It is a demonstration of a feature some people want (though these peoples are wrong to want this according to your authoritative judgement).

w0utert 7y ago
Can you explain why 'super strong windows' is a useful feature to have? I've never owned a pickup so I wouldn't know, but do the windows regularly break or something? Never happened to any of the cars I or anyone I know ever owned. Is it against car thieves or something? Because I imagine they would find a way around this anyway. What I'm wondering about is personal safety in case of an accident (water, fire, etc). How do you get out? In some EU countries a safety hammer to break the glass in case you are trapped is actually mandatory on new cars, how does unbreakable glass deal with that? Same goes for the sharp angles by the way, as demonstrated, this design will never be road-legal in the EU because new cars are not allowed to have sharp features for pedestrian safety.
- davedx 7y ago
  Never had a chip in your windscreen? Happens to our cars with annoying regularity here on flat well maintained Dutch roads. Imagine what happens to your windows if you regularly drive on construction sites or unpaved roads
- diffeomorphism 7y ago
  > Can you explain why 'super strong windows' is a useful feature to have? I am also not the target market and it is not something I personally find useful. But the post I was replying to was nonsensical (I don't see why they didn't pick the commodity option -> must be gaslighting).
  - Traster 7y ago
    Your argument would be far more compelling if someone could actually tell us why exactly the target market wants extra strong windows. I might not be the target market, but if someone says "Well I have a Ford and gravel flicks up and smashes my passenger side windows" I would be able to understand. The problem is that even the people doing the demonstration didn't actually tell us why you would want stronger windows.
- dirtyid 7y ago
  > new cars are not allowed to have sharp features for pedestrian safety Do you have more information on this. I know there's minimum radius for blunting sheet metal panel edges on the fascias that are prone to pedestrian collision. Seems pretty trivial change to smooth things out a little, though I wonder how much of the sharp edges here is value engineering vs desired aesthetic.
  - tomkarlo 7y ago
    The EU (and Japan and Australia) has a range of rules now for increasing pedestrian safety, including softer materials on the front bumper, hoods that give so that they cushion the impact if a pedestrian is hit, and limiteing sharp protrusions / edges on the front of the vehicle. The new G-wagon, for example, has turn signals that flex down into the vehicle on an impact. https://www.autonews.com/article/20120423/OEM03/304239967/european-safety-styled-cars-due-in-u-s https://www.autonews.com/article/20120423/OEM03/304239967/eu...
maxerickson 7y ago
Whatever glass they put in there will essentially be a commodity. They will have lots of options for getting it manufactured and so on.
- TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
  Which affects the final price and also the mechanical requirements. Bullet-proof glass isn't an exotic item, but you're not going to find it in most consumer products.

lolc 7y ago

3. They buy phone screen protectors on Amazon and stick them on the windows to make them stronger.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
And since Amazon commingles inventory, they got a counterfeit batch.

modernerd 7y ago

3. It's a PR stunt. It invites people who don't care much for Tesla or the vehicle itself to share the video, it softens the seriousness and tension of a launch, and it helps to humanise the brand and the presenter.

TheGallopedHigh 7y ago
Do you bleieve they are playing that type of self-deprecating meta?
- bil7 7y ago
  seems on brand for Mr. Musk to me.
- mytailorisrich 7y ago
  I believe that they are PR and marketing experts. They've created a big buzz that has everyone talking about this car. "Armor glass" that completely shatters when you throw something at it by hand? Come on... Also, why would it need armor glass in the first place? They picked a gimmick that is irrelevant to the product so that this "failure" does not hurt at all.
  - 9nGQluzmnq3M 7y ago
    If you think Tesla's PR and marketing is done by experts, please explain Musk's Thai cave rescue pedophile fiasco last year.
    - mytailorisrich 7y ago
      What has Tesla's PR team to do with Elon Musk's personal tweets? This is a very poor argument...
- modernerd 7y ago
  Sure, it seems plausible. It's slapstick comedy applied to PR. It's either clever marketing or a happy accident. SpaceX failed launches are marketing too, but they're not stunts. They are live tests that are filmed anyway. The fact they share the video is secondary to the main goal of the tests. But this? It's a staged marketing event. It's not a test procedure. The point is to get as many people to see it as possible. Smashing the windows doesn't cost much or stop a potential buyer in their tracks. The windows break easily in a highly visible but safe way (no broken glass fragments spilling onto the stage, no projectiles bouncing back into the audience). They repeat the “demonstration” with the same “accidental” result instead of just moving on. Musk knows it's fun to watch things go wrong, and it boosts the already high newsworthiness of the event. It would have been fun to watch anyway because company founders don't tend to let people throw things at their latest vehicle on stage, but that alone wouldn't make as many headlines as an accident.

_carl_jung 7y ago

If all it takes is "an adult who can design and manufacture commodity things efficiently", it should be pretty easy to set up some competition for Tesla with a team of competent "adults", right?

UserIsUnused 7y ago
He is talking about a very specific issue not about telsa engineering as a whole. The issue is wasting over-engineering small irrelevant stuff that provide no real benefit. He is criticizing a part of Tesla not Tesla as a whole. A company can do many great things and can still be crap in some others.
- _carl_jung 7y ago
  The phrasing makes it clear that this was a character attack on Elon himself, not Tesla.
lmm 7y ago
The hard part is finding "investors" who are happy to keep buying your bonds while you run a massive cash burn. Anyone can run a "successful" business as long as the supply of other people's money holds out.

friendlybus 7y ago

Elon sounded hurt for real. I think it just happened. They went on banging on car doors with sledgehammers that went fine, it was just one piece as part of the show around the same theme that it's a strong car.

nikofeyn 7y ago
yea, i believe it was for real too. they guy throwing the ball did so with much, much less force the second time.

joekrill 7y ago

"...have been a solved problem and commodity for a while" So there's absolutely no room for improvement? Should we just move on from everything that we've deemed "a solved problem and commodity"? Another possibility: they want to foster an image of a product designed to last, with very little maintenance cost. I'm not suggesting car windows are a maintenance cost, by the way - just that it adds to the overall image of reliability. Additionally, I'm not sure where you draw the line at what are "non-problems" and what exactly is and is not "wasting tons of r&d dollars". Or, as others have suggested, what constitutes a "PR stunt". Is it wasting time and resource to select Tesla-specific paints, interior designs, wheel designs? After all, every other car has those. They are "solved problems" - just do whatever the other guys are doing!

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

zubiaur 7y ago

They have close ties with AGP a company that specializes in high tech glass, the model X windshield is one of the most complex in the industry. AGP also specializes in bullet resistant glass and use many of their techniques in regular glass as well. I believe what musk said, they threw wrenches, a kitchen sink, just about Avery thing and it didn’t break. A metal ball is probably the worst case scenario. A solid ball will be very heavy, but even worse, there is only ONE point of contact. All the kinematic energy has to be stopped at ONE incredibly small point. What is the area of contact? It’s infinitesimally small! Even a bullet would have more contact area, and suffer plastic deformation. A metal sphere? Worst case scenario.

koonsolo 7y ago

Those windows are not normal. As far as I know, front windows always stay together when they break, and side windows scatter to little pieces. I understand why you would make the front window super strong. But the side windows, why can't they not scatter like in all the other cars?

eropple 7y ago
Automotive safety glass is usually the same in both windshields and side windows, but windshields are laminated together with plastic layers so when a front impact shatters them, they don't shred the people inside. As I understand it, the force of a (non-fatal) side impact in a car is generally less--reducing the danger of the above--and occupants need a way to escape in case of non-functioning doors, and so glass that can be broken free from the inside is the norm for cars. That looks like they laminated the side windows. I'm not sure I'd want to be in that even if it didn't have Musk's...musk...all over it.