4 ms·

I'm always fascinated to see a critique about a device (car in this case) that never once even mentions the core thing(s) the device is supposed to do. You did

by grecy 2y ago

I'm always fascinated to see a critique about a device (car in this case) that never once even mentions the core thing(s) the device is supposed to do. You didn't even mention any of - fuel mileage, road noise, driver fatigue, comfort of seats, performance of HVAC, visibility, crash safety, passenger comfort and entertainment, storage volume, leg room. You know, transporting meat sacks safely, comfortably and cheaply. I personally think it's because vehicle manufacturers have spent the last ~20 years not really improving the core vehicle at all, and instead convincing people that massage seats and car play are actually important. Personally I think they're a distraction from the fact most cars today get the same horrible mileage they did 20 years ago. If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it. And that is what EVs are. So far they're mostly focusing on the core product and have not spent the time or money on the fluff.

Breza 2y ago
I was driving a 2016 Ford Fiesta. Last year I decided it was too small for my family of three. I wanted an EV, and my needs focus on exactly the practical stuff you describe. I don't need a car that I can turn into a robotaxi or whatnot. I was incredibly disappointed by Tesla. I tried all the EVs at the DC auto show and it feels like all the legacy manufacturers have caught up with Tesla at every price point. I ended up buying a Bolt EUV. It's amazing how much comfort and capability I got per dollar spent. Much better than any Tesla.
AlexandrB 2y ago
I find this to be a weird perspective because EVs, and especially Tesla, seem to be focused entirely on fluff. That's one of the reasons they cost so damn much compared to ICE "economy" compacts. Things like "pop out" door handles and steel body panels are fluff. A steering "yoke" is fluff. Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff. Constant (broken) FSD promises are fluff. Features like a HUD or stalks on the steering wheel would make a driver's experience better and more comfortable. The former they never added, the latter they removed (probably to improve margin).
- Symbiote 2y ago
  The last EV I drove was a Renault Zoe, as they're available for hire from the street with an app. It is a normal, small, city car. Windscreen wipers on the usual stalks, knobs and buttons for climate control, etc. In part because it lacks some electronic safety features (lane-departure warning, automatic emergency braking) it has a very poor safety rating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Zoe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Zoe
- everforward 2y ago
  > Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff. This one I actually think would have been somewhat useful, presuming it was cheap enough to actually use. I don't throw steel bearings at my car, but I would imagine that strength probably carries over to stuff falling out of trucks, rocks being flung by tires, etc. It's not world-changing, but it would have been useful.
  - yfw 2y ago
    Good luck when you drive into a lake and can't break your way out like that dead billionaire
    - jpc0 2y ago
      Do you regularly drive your car into lakes? I would legitimately be surprised if I ever know a person that this has happened to never mind if it ever happened to me.
      - Joey2121 2y ago
        There was a wealthy lady that was driving drunk I believe in the news who put her Tesla into her pond by accident and drowned b/c she couldn't get the windows down and the doors to open. Her biggest problem was the alcohol though. Friends could not save her b/c they could not break the laminated glass. We have safety hammers in all of our cars for that reason.
  - berniedurfee 2y ago
dragontamer 2y ago
This is a $40,000 to $60,000 vehicle. I have expectations. If I just wanted to safely transport people from pointA to pointB reliably and efficiently, the answer is a Toyota Corolla Hybrid at nearly half the cost. If you're competing against $40k vehicles, then I think its fair to compare to... I dunno, an Ioniq 6 or something? Full EV, faster charging, better tech, better road noise, etc. etc. etc. Tesla's core product, the car, has worse safety, tech, and other features than any competitor. And with regards to the Highland update, it doesn't even add any of the recent innovations that are "fashionable" in today's day-and-age. Its 2024. A freaking Corolla has some of the features I listed above, at again, nearly half the price of a typical Tesla. Tesla's tech stack is severely out of date even with the update. > If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it. I think that's called a Ford Maverick. Ford Maverick ain't 70mpg, but its cheaper to drive than supercharger / fast chargers (where costs skyrocket for EVs to 30+ cents / kwhr).
antisthenes 2y ago
> Personally I think they're a distraction from the fact most cars today get the same horrible mileage they did 20 years ago. You can't fight physics. A gas-powered sedan weighed down by all the modern safety requirements can only get ~43mpg on the highway. A hybrid boosts this to ~55mpg and also greatly improves city efficiency. Above those numbers, you're looking at engines that are severely underpowered (1.0 liters) or is more EV than gas car. > I personally think it's because vehicle manufacturers have spent the last ~20 years not really improving the core vehicle at all, and instead convincing people that massage seats and car play are actually important. Well, yes. To please the American consumerist mindset, you have to keep inventing new features even if the new feature is a complete gimmick or just a subscription, or taking out physical buttons (e.g. all strictly negatives). > If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it. At that point why not just wish for a magic horse that flies or something. 70 MPG is an EV number. You'll never get a gas car that gets that mileage.
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  > 70 MPG is an EV number. You'll never get a gas car that gets that mileage. My old 320d did those on the motorwaym and more sometimes. It wasn't the average, but given almost all my driving was motorway, it wasn't far off.
  - callalex 2y ago
    Diesel fuel contains more energy per gallon/Liter so that’s not a useful comparison.
    - Symbiote 2y ago
      Also if "motorway" implies Britain, Imperial gallons are 20% larger than US gallons.
      - robertlagrant 2y ago
        It does! But then also I don't know what a gallon of electricity is.

by grecy 2y ago

Breza 2y ago

I was driving a 2016 Ford Fiesta. Last year I decided it was too small for my family of three. I wanted an EV, and my needs focus on exactly the practical stuff you describe. I don't need a car that I can turn into a robotaxi or whatnot. I was incredibly disappointed by Tesla. I tried all the EVs at the DC auto show and it feels like all the legacy manufacturers have caught up with Tesla at every price point. I ended up buying a Bolt EUV. It's amazing how much comfort and capability I got per dollar spent. Much better than any Tesla.

AlexandrB 2y ago

I find this to be a weird perspective because EVs, and especially Tesla, seem to be focused entirely on fluff. That's one of the reasons they cost so damn much compared to ICE "economy" compacts. Things like "pop out" door handles and steel body panels are fluff. A steering "yoke" is fluff. Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff. Constant (broken) FSD promises are fluff. Features like a HUD or stalks on the steering wheel would make a driver's experience better and more comfortable. The former they never added, the latter they removed (probably to improve margin).

Symbiote 2y ago
The last EV I drove was a Renault Zoe, as they're available for hire from the street with an app. It is a normal, small, city car. Windscreen wipers on the usual stalks, knobs and buttons for climate control, etc. In part because it lacks some electronic safety features (lane-departure warning, automatic emergency braking) it has a very poor safety rating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Zoe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Zoe
everforward 2y ago
> Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff. This one I actually think would have been somewhat useful, presuming it was cheap enough to actually use. I don't throw steel bearings at my car, but I would imagine that strength probably carries over to stuff falling out of trucks, rocks being flung by tires, etc. It's not world-changing, but it would have been useful.
- yfw 2y ago
  Good luck when you drive into a lake and can't break your way out like that dead billionaire
  - jpc0 2y ago
    Do you regularly drive your car into lakes? I would legitimately be surprised if I ever know a person that this has happened to never mind if it ever happened to me.
    - Joey2121 2y ago
      There was a wealthy lady that was driving drunk I believe in the news who put her Tesla into her pond by accident and drowned b/c she couldn't get the windows down and the doors to open. Her biggest problem was the alcohol though. Friends could not save her b/c they could not break the laminated glass. We have safety hammers in all of our cars for that reason.
- berniedurfee 2y ago

dragontamer 2y ago

This is a $40,000 to $60,000 vehicle. I have expectations. If I just wanted to safely transport people from pointA to pointB reliably and efficiently, the answer is a Toyota Corolla Hybrid at nearly half the cost. If you're competing against $40k vehicles, then I think its fair to compare to... I dunno, an Ioniq 6 or something? Full EV, faster charging, better tech, better road noise, etc. etc. etc. Tesla's core product, the car, has worse safety, tech, and other features than any competitor. And with regards to the Highland update, it doesn't even add any of the recent innovations that are "fashionable" in today's day-and-age. Its 2024. A freaking Corolla has some of the features I listed above, at again, nearly half the price of a typical Tesla. Tesla's tech stack is severely out of date even with the update. > If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it. I think that's called a Ford Maverick. Ford Maverick ain't 70mpg, but its cheaper to drive than supercharger / fast chargers (where costs skyrocket for EVs to 30+ cents / kwhr).

antisthenes 2y ago

> Personally I think they're a distraction from the fact most cars today get the same horrible mileage they did 20 years ago. You can't fight physics. A gas-powered sedan weighed down by all the modern safety requirements can only get ~43mpg on the highway. A hybrid boosts this to ~55mpg and also greatly improves city efficiency. Above those numbers, you're looking at engines that are severely underpowered (1.0 liters) or is more EV than gas car. > I personally think it's because vehicle manufacturers have spent the last ~20 years not really improving the core vehicle at all, and instead convincing people that massage seats and car play are actually important. Well, yes. To please the American consumerist mindset, you have to keep inventing new features even if the new feature is a complete gimmick or just a subscription, or taking out physical buttons (e.g. all strictly negatives). > If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it. At that point why not just wish for a magic horse that flies or something. 70 MPG is an EV number. You'll never get a gas car that gets that mileage.

robertlagrant 2y ago
> 70 MPG is an EV number. You'll never get a gas car that gets that mileage. My old 320d did those on the motorwaym and more sometimes. It wasn't the average, but given almost all my driving was motorway, it wasn't far off.
- callalex 2y ago
  Diesel fuel contains more energy per gallon/Liter so that’s not a useful comparison.
  - Symbiote 2y ago
    Also if "motorway" implies Britain, Imperial gallons are 20% larger than US gallons.
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      It does! But then also I don't know what a gallon of electricity is.