Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
NyetARussianSpy

What do you think of Teslas?

Recommended Posts

Just now, tiggerlator said:

Well most of the programs i see here, they drive big mahoosive 4x4, or show off stupid custom cars with,insane engines in them. I guess now the intelligent well of middle class will drive, bmw/mercedes. At least the engine sizes are getting more sensible. I understand the distances are much bigger compared to the UK

The downsizing trend of small engine + turbo produces better result under testing conditions, but real world use they use just as much fuel as their larger naturally aspirated predecessors. If you genuinely want to reduce fuel consumption, and therefore pollution, reduce weight, or add lightness as Colin Chapman said.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Monkey Dust said:

The downsizing trend of small engine + turbo produces better result under testing conditions, but real world use they use just as much fuel as their larger naturally aspirated predecessors. If you genuinely want to reduce fuel consumption, and therefore pollution, reduce weight, or add lightness as Colin Chapman said.    

I'd argue that problem only really exists in vehicles with ridiculously small engines to begin with when you throw turbos on them.

I'll take the base engine in the current Chevrolet Malibu, for example: it's a 1.5L turbo-4 making around 160hp. For a midsize sedan, that's pretty fucking anemic and the fuel economy matches that. But when you start putting turbo-4s that make around 250 or more horsepower in a midsize sedan, then your fuel economy might go up compared to a comparable V6, especially in driving with less stops.

The same basically goes with turbo V6's vs. naturally aspirated V8s with similar power and etc., so long as the power output is comparable.

Edited by Dan Castellaneta
clarifying a little

Volume / Normalized 100% / 89% (content loudness 1.0dB)

Yes, I'm gay and don't give a shit about pride. My sexuality isn't my personality; my VHS tapes and my video captures are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Monkey Dust said:

The downsizing trend of small engine + turbo produces better result under testing conditions, but real world use they use just as much fuel as their larger naturally aspirated predecessors.

BuT THeY uSe WaSTeD eNeRGy!!


Yup the yup.

 

Socialism is for figs.

Not supporting the political facade known as "Gay Pride."

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Curious Pineapple said:

An electric motor should never wear out either apart from bearings, requires no oil to lubricate it, and has less inherent losses.

Electric motors absolutely do wear out and do need lubrication. They just don't need a constant, circulating supply of oil like combustion engines.

 

Though they are so much more efficient than ICEs it's almost comical.

2 hours ago, TempestCatto said:

The massive benefit over EV's is road trips (among other things like utility work). I'm not waiting 20 fucking minutes to go another 180 miles. It's a huge waste. EV's are better suited as an everyday driver/city car. Powering an EV directly does seem about the same, but personally I don't see the benefit if you'll be waiting around longer to get the same amount of "fuel". I guess for someone like me, who drives a lot more than most, an EV just seems like a worthless investment, especially since I live in the stix.

Hydrogen cars are an even less developed technology than BEVs. Right now you're waiting 20 minutes for 180-250 miles of range, but by the time hydrogen cars are practical that will have changed drastically.

 

Of course, charging a battery will continue to be slower than moving physical fuel for a while, but ultimately that's the only advantage of hydrogen cars. They're more complex, considerably less efficient, and still need sizable batteries.

 

Plus, people get hyperbolic and say that lithium batteries 'explode' (They don't, they just burn. Slowly.), but hydrogen is very volatile. There's a reason they put so much work into those tanks. They actually can explode.

 

I think hydrogen cars are a great solution to a very specific problem, and I hope we keep developing them into more practical vehicles, I just don't currently see how they'll ever surpass BEVs.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

Electric motors absolutely do wear out and do need lubrication. They just don't need a constant, circulating supply of oil like combustion engines.

 

Though they are so much more efficient than ICEs it's almost comical.

Apart from bearings, a motor that's 50% over-rated for the application shouldn't fail in any reasonable lifespan. IC engines need the oil changing as combustion byproducts, hydrocarbons and heat cause the oil to break down, loosing it's lubrication properties. No such issue with an electric motor as all the load is tortional so ball or roller bearings can be used and they just need lubricating at the factory and are sealed for life.

 

A good modern Diesel is about 40% efficient, 60% of the energy in the fuel is wasted as heat and some pisses off in vibration. From battery to energy that's actually moving the electric car, about 80% ends up as kinetic. Theres losses in the battery, wiring, connectors, control electronics etc, but nowhere near as bad as burning a fuel for the expanding gasses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2019 at 3:14 PM, Dan Castellaneta said:

See, I actually don't mind electric cars or all the bizarre and neat features that Tesla is bringing to the table. That being said, I could never in a million years own a Tesla simply because of the stigma that comes with it: you officially become someone who has a vanity plate that says "LOL GAS" or "NO GAS".

That being said again, I wouldn't mind an electric car, something more contemporary-looking like the Audi e-tron SUV (not a fan of crossovers but as far as electric vehicles go, I like how normal it looks) rather than something as show-y or as "Look at me!" like a Fisker Karma or any of the Teslas.

If there was an electric Legacy, I'd be heads over heels.

Or an E-86/BRZ.


Do you like Transit? If you do, feel free to leave a post on the Transit thread.

Subaru fans unite.

Desktop(s):

Thunder (main rig):

Ryzen 5 1600@3.9 GHz (1.294V)|ASRock AB350 Pro 4|AMD Wraith Spire|16GB G.Skill RIPJAWS V DDR4 2400 RAM (2x8)|WD Black 256 GB NVME SSD|1TB WD Blue 7200 RPM HDD|6 TB of external storage|GTX 10606GB Turbo|CX650M|Windows 10 Pro|Cooler Master Masterbox Lite 5 RGB|Dell SE2417HG|LG25UM58-P Ultrawide OC 75 Hz (At Max Res)|Dell SP2008WFP|Logitech G602|G.Skill KM570MX (Cherry MX Blue)

 

Dell XPS 420:

Core 2 Quad Q6600 @2.4GHz|Some Dell BTX Socket LGA 775 MoBo|Some Dell cooler|8 GB MemoryTek DDR2 800 RAM|~600 GB(2 HDDs)|Dell Optical Drive|NVidia GeForce 8800 GT|Ubuntu 19.04 Disco Dingo|Insignia TV from 2007

 

Watch, because why not: Casio AE1200WHD-1A

 

Phone: Samsung Galaxy s8 64GB (with a 200 GB MicroSD card)

 

Laptop(s):

Acer Spin 15 64GB Chromebook:

Intel Pentium N4200|4GB RAM|64GB SSD|32GB MicroSD card|Intel HD 510|Acer 3 amp power brick

 

 

Dell Latitude D630:

Intel Core 2 Duo T7300|4GB DDR2|Mobile Intel 935 Express Chipset|1440x900 display|No HDD

A bunch of Dell Vostro 1000s that I got for free

An old Powerbook that I got for free

And an old 17" Macbook Pro Mid-2007

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Curious Pineapple said:

-snip-

I'm not arguing that electric motors are short-lived, it's just unrealistic to say they need no lubrication and don't wear.

 

As for efficiency, yeah, the difference is extreme.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dash Lambda said:

Hydrogen cars are an even less developed technology than BEVs. Right now you're waiting 20 minutes for 180-250 miles of range, but by the time hydrogen cars are practical that will have changed drastically.

 

Of course, charging a battery will continue to be slower than moving physical fuel for a while, but ultimately that's the only advantage of hydrogen cars. They're more complex, considerably less efficient, and still need sizable batteries.

 

Plus, people get hyperbolic and say that lithium batteries 'explode' (They don't, they just burn. Slowly.), but hydrogen is very volatile. There's a reason they put so much work into those tanks. They actually can explode.

 

I think hydrogen cars are a great solution to a very specific problem, and I hope we keep developing them into more practical vehicles, I just don't currently see how they'll ever surpass BEVs.

That's not entirely true. There's quite a few filling stations in Cali right now, and at Air Products HQ (next to where I live). They're actually pretty practical as it stands, they're just not mass produced as there's not as near as many filling stations as gas/diesel (and it would not be hard to incorporate either). 

 

I know lithium batteries don't explode. Gas is also very volatile, though not as much as hydrogen. But it's not that much more than gas anyway. I've seen a regular everyday car (powered by gas) explode upon impact with a tractor trailer, so no matter what there's always a catch (though I'm curious if an EV would have exploded, I don't think it would have, but it'd of still caught fire I bet). 

 

Currently, I don't see it happening either. But I think that's because there's no market for it yet either. Once the general public is educated more on this stuff, there'll be more investors and more overall interest. I think it will take quite awhile before we get there too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, tiggerlator said:

Eventually oil will run out, what then for classics etc, also eventually ic engines will be banned of just phase out as cleaner means of transport become more prevalent. My response to anyone with a ic engined classic etc in that case is tough. It's time we did something about the pollution from ic vehicles, especially America with their ludicrous and unnecessary 5litre engined cars.

You think 5 liters is unecessary? Bask in the glory of the 8.2L Cadillac!

 

Quote

For 1970 Cadillac fitted a crankshaft with a 4.304 in (109.3 mm) stroke, increasing total displacement on the engine to 500.02 cu in (8.2 L).  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_V8_engine#500

 

In all seriousness, I simply cannot invest in electric vehicles until they become more affordable and the infrastructure is better. Currently both are lacking, the latter especially.


Spoiler

PCPartPicker Part List: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/kmxLMZ

CPU: Intel - Core i5-8600K 3.6 GHz 6-Core OEM/Tray Processor  (Purchased For $200.00) 
CPU Cooler: Noctua - NH-L9i 33.84 CFM CPU Cooler  (Purchased For $44.49) 
Motherboard: Gigabyte - Z390 I AORUS PRO WIFI Mini ITX LGA1151 Motherboard  (Purchased For $154.99) 
Memory: G.Skill - Trident Z RGB 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3000 Memory  (Purchased For $130.00) 
Storage: Crucial - MX300 1.05 TB 2.5" Solid State Drive  (Purchased For $200.00) 
Storage: Western Digital - Red 8 TB 3.5" 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive  (Purchased For $130.00) 
Video Card: Gigabyte - GeForce GTX 670 2 GB Video Card  (Purchased For $30.00) 
Case: Cooler Master - Elite 120 Advanced (Black) Mini ITX Tower Case  (Purchased For $25.00) 
Power Supply: Corsair - HX Platinum 1000 W 80+ Platinum Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply  (Purchased For $130.00) 
Optical Drive: Asus - BW-12B1ST/BLK/G/AS Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer  (Purchased For $75.00) 
Operating System: Microsoft - Windows 10 Pro OEM 64-bit  (Purchased For $0.00) 
Monitor: Dell - U2417H 24.0" 1920x1080 60 Hz Monitor  (Purchased For $0.00) 
Monitor: LG - 34UM69G-B 34.0" 2560x1080 75 Hz Monitor  (Purchased For $0.00) 
External Storage: Western Digital - My Passport Slim 1 TB External Hard Drive  (Purchased For $20.00) 
External Storage: Seagate - Backup Plus 1 TB External Hard Drive  (Purchased For $20.00) 
Total: $1159.48

Main PC: See spoiler tag

Laptop: Early 2014 Macbook Air. Intel i5-4260U, 4GB RAM, 128GB Apple PCI-E SSD, Intel HD Graphics 5000

Phone: iPhone XS Max 64GB: A12 Bionic. 4GB RAM, 6.5-inch 2,688 x 1,242 OLED, 3,174 mAh 

Wearables: Sony 1000XM2

Random devices in various stages of working: Dell Inspiron 1000 (Works perfect other than battery), Late 2008 Macbook Aluminum Unibody (For Sale), Gateway Solo W2000 Laptop (For writing floppies, needs a battery), iBook G4 (For Sale.), Surface 3 (Touch screen is borked, perfect otherwise.), Lenovo G580 (For Sale)

 

Spoiler

"Love is a bitch with a blindfold" You clicked the wrong spoiler! Hah! Bet you feel really bamboozled now!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

That's not entirely true. There's quite a few filling stations in Cali right now, and at Air Products HQ (next to where I live). They're actually pretty practical as it stands, they're just not mass produced as there's not as near as many filling stations as gas/diesel (and it would not be hard to incorporate either). 

 

I know lithium batteries don't explode. Gas is also very volatile, though not as much as hydrogen. But it's not that much more than gas anyway. I've seen a regular everyday car (powered by gas) explode upon impact with a tractor trailer, so no matter what there's always a catch (though I'm curious if an EV would have exploded, I don't think it would have, but it'd of still caught fire I bet). 

 

Currently, I don't see it happening either. But I think that's because there's no market for it yet either. Once the general public is educated more on this stuff, there'll be more investors and more overall interest. I think it will take quite awhile before we get there too.

Fuel cells are getting there, both in terms of power and efficiency. The one in the current Mirai makes ~150 hp and (gathered from sparse sources) seems to be somewhere around ~40% efficient. I don't have numbers for the reliability, but the biggest player here is Toyota, so I'd assume that's doing well too.

 

The problem is the power chain. Gas, hydrogen, and batteries are all just ways of storing energy.

-Gas was great because it can be easily processed and we don't have to go to great lengths to find it (though that's becoming less true every year), but it's a limited resource and also kind'a ruining our habitat.

-Batteries move the power generation outside the vehicle, so the grid itself acts like the engine; Since industrial generators are, on average, significantly more efficient than automotive engines, BEVs manage to be more energy efficient than ICE vehicles even if the grid relies on fossil fuels. That's also where the criticism that BEVs still use oil comes from, but that's irrelevant because BEVs don't care where we get the energy, and we need to transition the rest of our infrastructure anyway.

-Hydrogen introduces two extra steps in that process. The energy is produced by more conventional technologies, then used to produce hydrogen at (optimistically) ~70% efficiency, then used in an HFC that's 40-50% efficient, which outputs to a battery. That energy could have just gone directly into a battery.

 

Biofuels are more renewable than petroleum, and they generally burn cleaner, but they also have a lower energy density than gas and move the resource strain to agriculture. I think they're limited to a stopgap effort. Hydrogen puts more strain on energy production, plus would require a whole new industry to produce enough hydrogen for any meaningful market adoption.

 

If you don't care about energy efficiency, HFCs are great. They're convenient, produce enough power, and despite their complexity don't have the same sort of hard-limited lifespan that lithium batteries do (and the buffer batteries they use are a perfect application for supercapacitors). If we have a cheap fusion renaissance in the near future, we'll probably see HFCs get a lot more attention (especially because we'd be processing hydrogen for deuterium anyway), but for now it's kind of counterproductive to add more layers of inefficiency to the system just for faster fill-ups.

8 hours ago, NyetARussianSpy said:

Depends where you live though, live in Pothole City, not going to work so well. Live in Sunny California? Drive on!

This is the source of one of my favorite interactions between an industry and media, in excessively condensed and simplified form:


Self-Driving Companies: "Look at how safe and reliable autonomous cars are!"

Media: "You're testing them in ideal conditions, they're not dealing with inclement weather or bad roads!"

Self-Driving Companies: "Fine, we'll test them in Michigan."

Media: "That works."


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Electric cars are like building a really nice, amazing couch for your new house before you actually have a house: If most electrical power in so many places of the world is still generated by burning coal or oil, moving to electrical cars doesn't really has a significant effect.

 

Hybrids are a good enough transition model since you get almost unmatched fuel economy (fuel economy = tangible difference in emissions) while we transition to massive renewable electric sources.

 

But #1 should be way better, efficient, subsidized public transport since nothing helps the environment more than not having to own a fucking car since public transport is that good and let's face it, it never is for even massive mega cities where people still fucking drive everywhere cause they need to.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Electric cars are like building a really nice, amazing couch for your new house before you actually have a house: If most electrical power in so many places of the world is still generated by burning coal or oil, moving to electrical cars doesn't really has a significant effect.

Transitioning to electric cars and transitioning infrastructure away from fossil fuels don't have to go in any particular order. Both need to transition. That sort of logic just leads to a "well, changing this wouldn't make much of a difference anyway" feedback loop.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dash Lambda said:

Transitioning to electric cars and transitioning infrastructure away from fossil fuels don't have to go in any particular order. Both need to transition. That sort of logic just leads to a "well, changing this wouldn't make much of a difference anyway" feedback loop.

Except cars are and end user product and outside of the us, electricity isn't a commodity so there is little to no say in the matter from the general public. 

 

Its basically an uphill battle vs billionaires who aren't willing to stop unless forced to no matter how many electricals people buy it won't make a difference before a strong political push to dismantle oil companies happens and it's still going the other way in fact: we're basically fucked. 


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Except cars are and end user product and outside of the us, electricity isn't a commodity so there is little to no say in the matter from the general public. 

 

Its basically an uphill battle vs billionaires who aren't willing to stop unless forced to no matter how many electricals people buy it won't make a difference before a strong political push to dismantle oil companies happens and it's still going the other way in fact: we're basically fucked. 

If you transition cars but not the infrastructure, you didn't improve the fuel consumption of cars very much.

If you transition the infrastructure but not cars, you didn't improve the fuel consumption of cars at all.

If you transition both the cars and infrastructure, you eliminated the fuel consumption of cars.

 

They're two separate processes, and one going slowly doesn't mean the other doesn't matter. All that matters is they both happen.

 

It's more like upgrading the components in a gaming PC. If you have an ancient CPU and GPU, then upgrading either one individually won't help you much in games. The difference here is that with computers you should wait 'til you can afford all your components then buy them together, while with the energy and automotive industries waiting only digs a deeper hole.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

If you transition cars but not the infrastructure, you didn't improve the fuel consumption of cars very much.

If you transition the infrastructure but not cars, you didn't improve the fuel consumption of cars at all.

If you transition both the cars and infrastructure, you eliminated the fuel consumption of cars.

 

They're two separate processes, and one going slowly doesn't mean the other doesn't matter. All that matters is they both happen.

 

It's more like upgrading the components in a gaming PC. If you have an ancient CPU and GPU, then upgrading either one individually won't help you much in games. The difference here is that with computers you should wait 'til you can afford all your components then buy them together, while with the energy and automotive industries waiting only digs a deeper hole.

I don't even need to disagree, I just think that you're completely sidestepping my main point about oil companies and their stranglehold on both the economy and their thorough corruption of government officials.

 

Even if I agreed with everything you say all of that would be for nothing until oil companies are dismantled and Neoliberal governments reformed or overthrown. That's the only way forward to revert climate change: dismantle the far and away main and most consistent polluters. If you didn't want to acknowledge that point to avoid a political discussion that is fine as well, you can state as much but let's not mince word: even if I'm 100% wrong and you're 100% right about everything else it wouldn't matter if the uphill battle is against powerful oil magnates and companies that are rolling back protections and relaxing restrictions under Trump.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

I don't even need to disagree, I just think that you're completely sidestepping my main point about oil companies and their stranglehold on both the economy and their thorough corruption of government officials.

 

Even if I agreed with everything you say all of that would be for nothing until oil companies are dismantled and Neoliberal governments reformed or overthrown. That's the only way forward to revert climate change: dismantle the far and away main and most consistent polluters. If you didn't want to acknowledge that point to avoid a political discussion that is fine as well, you can state as much but let's not mince word: even if I'm 100% wrong and you're 100% right about everything else it wouldn't matter if the uphill battle is against powerful oil magnates and companies that are rolling back protections and relaxing restrictions under Trump.

Oh, I completely agree. My point is that that's a different issue, a far larger one in fact. When talking about oil usage in cars, there's no reason to not bother with cars before we push everything else through. Just because one thing is more important doesn't mean we shouldn't care about everything else.

 

You don't make a light car by taking the weight out of somewhere, you do it by taking the weight out of everywhere. You don't optimize manufacturing costs by making something cheaper, you do it by making everything cheaper.

 

It's only for nothing if we never make the transition with everything else, in which case everything we've ever done is for nothing because then we'll just fucking die. I'd rather not assume that we're so incompetent as a species that we really will manage to go extinct due to short-sighted corporate greed.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

I'd rather not assume that we're so incompetent as a species that we really will manage to go extinct due to short-sighted corporate greed.

Unfortunately, i think you hit the nail on the head there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tiggerlator said:

Unfortunately, I think you hit the nail on the head there.

My field of study is AGI. I'm doing my damndest to make sure we have a Skynet before that happens.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

Oh, I completely agree. My point is that that's a different issue, a far larger one in fact. When talking about oil usage in cars, there's no reason to not bother with cars before we push everything else through. Just because one thing is more important doesn't mean we shouldn't care about everything else.

 

You don't make a light car by taking the weight out of somewhere, you do it by taking the weight out of everywhere. You don't optimize manufacturing costs by making something cheaper, you do it by making everything cheaper.

 

It's only for nothing if we never make the transition with everything else, in which case everything we've ever done is for nothing because then we'll just fucking die. I'd rather not assume that we're so incompetent as a species that we really will manage to go extinct due to short-sighted corporate greed.

Ok that's fair enough and your points about this being kind of a chicken and egg argument is not lost on me.

 

So back on topic a bit how is Tesla coming along with the cheaper models for mass production? Here in Mexico for example they do have "orders" available for Model Y but they start at 52k USD. For reference, here I can get a decent sized house in a decentish neighborhood for that much. Whereas Toyota is selling the Prius C for 17k USD so I could almost pay for the Prius C out of pocket with what I would need to start financing the Model Y if I want to finish paying for it before I die.

 

So while the Model Y would be overall better (In theory anyway, in practice Mexico is a pretty damn big offender in powering most of electricity with coal. So in practice I'd be looking at another 8 grand for solar panels to really lessen my impact overall) the Prius C hybrid is still way better than the gasoline only options available and it's relatively reasonable at only like a 30% premium in price vs similarly sized models.


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

So back on topic a bit how is Tesla coming along with the cheaper models for mass production?

I've actually been seeing a shocking number of them recently. Like, every time I go driving it's not unusual to see at least two unique Model 3s. And I'm in Michigan, the state that tried (and for a while succeeded) to make it illegal for Tesla to even sell them here with weird dealership laws. Hell, I'm a half-hour drive from the GM/Ford nexus.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
5 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

But #1 should be way better, efficient, subsidized public transport since nothing helps the environment more than not having to own a fucking car since public transport is that good and let's face it, it never is for even massive mega cities where people still fucking drive everywhere cause they need to. 

Not everyone lives in an area where public transportation is reliable, the environment becomes less important when busses go on regular strikes and trains comes 30 minutes late.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
6 hours ago, Dash Lambda said:

This is the source of one of my favorite interactions between an industry and media, in excessively condensed and simplified form:


Self-Driving Companies: "Look at how safe and reliable autonomous cars are!"

Media: "You're testing them in ideal conditions, they're not dealing with inclement weather or bad roads!"

Self-Driving Companies: "Fine, we'll test them in Michigan."

Media: "That works." 

Just from where I'm from, in a metropolitan city, roads are filled with potholes, tar is unevenly layered, sometimes sidewalk bricks are used on main roads and it is common for commerical establishments to be setup on sidewalks, forcing pedestrians to walk on the road (and on busy days, entire roads become engulfed) reducing the amount of available space for drivers. Most cities over here aren't even planned and violate their own design regulations....

 

Would I dare to use Autopilot in such circumstances? That's either expensive suicide or murder. Can I use them on long highways? Courtesy of road irregularities, I can - but it's risky.

 

I'm not to concerned about weather, just horrible road design, even worse city design, and bylanes that have bylanes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
26 minutes ago, Dash Lambda said:

And I'm in Michigan, the state that tried (and for a while succeeded) to make it illegal for Tesla to even sell them here with weird dealership laws.

Why does Michigan have a thing for dealerships?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, NyetARussianSpy said:

Not everyone lives in an area where public transportation is reliable, the environment becomes less important when busses go on regular strikes and trains comes 30 minutes late.

Yeah I am well aware: that's why I said it should be"'way better, efficient, subsidized" meaning that it needs to be greatly expanded, far more efficient and accessible to all of the population without the drawbacks current systems have like being unreliable, expensive and with poor coverage of several smaller cities or suburban areas. I am not saying "Go ride the bus or trains" I am saying "Demand that far more money is invested in public transport so this becomes a more realistic option"


-------

Current Rig

-------

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NyetARussianSpy said:

Why does Michigan have a thing for dealerships?

We have a thing for a lot of auto-industry things, 'cause Michigan. It's like California and tech companies, except there are three auto companies here. We're sort of a microcosm of what auto companies wish everywhere else would be like.


"Do as I say, not as I do."

-Because you actually care if it makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×