Range is not an issue for most. It’s an issue if you haul or tow. SUVs are crossovers, not trucks.
OT: Electric vehicles
- Thread starter BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap
- Start date
Range is always an issue. Drivers in general want uninterrupted driving convenience.
Small unibody SUVs are crossovers. The full-size category is not. Full-size SUVs are big, heavy and inefficient - not ideal for a mass market EV. They're as unnecessary as 1,000 miles of range for so many drivers, which is why the crossover segment arrived and exploded - don't see that reversing with electrics.
Agreed to disagree on range. 90% of drivers are not driving over 150 miles daily.
The plan is for Optimus to first work within Tesla factories. Cost will be "less than a Tesla vehicle" according to Elon.
Amazing progress in a little over 1 year. Not bad for just a car company. Optimus will not have to be coded to learn new tasks. Video in, controls out. Should make for rapid progress.
What does an economy look like with unlimited labor?
Maybe they can get the robots to debug the autopilot code. Can't be much worse than the hoomans have done.
This isn’t true. The average household drives 40 miles per day.
What isn't true?
That doesn't refute anything I said. We've been hearing that stat since the Chevy Volt and Nissan Leaf were the hot new electric rides.
I think it would be interesting to factor in how many households have a single car. With multiple cars, where one is a hybrid or ICE, having a low-range EV as a commuter car seems okay, although 150 mile range probably would worry some who live in colder regions or lack charging facilities at work.
But for people with a single vehicle, it would be really dumb, IMO, to purchase a low-range EV, and 150 mile range should be considered laughable.
Charging speed may have something to do with this too. The BOLT (not Volt) and Leaf max out at 50 kW.
I'm a less than 50 mi/day person on average and wouldn't consider either vehicle, but low range is only part of the reason. Too small, aesthetics, slow charging speed, and sub par performance being the others.
? Most EVs have range over 200 miles. My point is that most people don’t come close to max.
I know. I'm saying if actual avg range mattered, then 150 miles or 200 miles would be enough for mass adoption. Buyers aren't compelled by that argument, though. That 40ish mile estimate has been out there for 15 years - GM publicized it in preparation of the Volt launch. Didn't send people running to buy EVs in the intervening years.
I'm just saying I don't believe the full-size SUV market will be the key driver to a mass market EV. They're expensive and suffer from decades of proven inefficiency that will hamper their range - real and perceived. Not so different from pickups.
Think that's a good thing, though. So many people don't really need a massive restaurant fridge on wheels (or a big *** pickup truck, for that matter). Electrification should help them realize that.
These are 7-figure robots that need to be programmed to complete every action you see.
That's not what Tesla is doing.
That's incorrect. They don't all need to be programmed to complete every action. Also, there's a lot of work going on at BD that isn't public information.
BD's robots don't all cost 7 figures. Some don't even cost 6 figures. Some aren't for sale at any price (yet). Not sure where you're getting your information on prices, since again, not all of what BD is doing is public information.
IIRC, Tesla hasn't yet started selling any robots. A target of $20K (the last number I heard, correct me if I'm wrong), and any price comparison to other robots, is meaningless until we see what the actual products are and what they can and cannot do.
Bunch of folks in my neighborhood are 2 car households with both being EVs. they don't seem like the roadtripping types, so I guess it works for them.
Guess my definition of full size SUV = 3 rows. Very high demand and more manufacturers are adding it to their lineup.
I suppose if they do go on a road-trip, they could always rent something, if they want.
Ah, that could be our point of contention. EVs will be able to better accommodate the extra row in a smaller body so I could certainly see it becoming more common. Don't disagree much there.
Just don't see everyone jumping into an electric Yukon.
There do seem to be diminishing returns as vehicle sizes, weights, and workloads increase. At least given where we're currently at with battery tech.
A mechanical engineer friend that works with trains talked about the issues w/an EV locomotive. The summary being that the weight of the required batteries are, at this time, unworkable (according to him) despite a lot of push to make it work for anything other than the shortest of routes.
Planes and ships are an even more obvious problem. The solution to all 3 (planes, trains, ships) may wind up being hydrogen-based e-fuels. Or not. We'll see.
But I also think there's a decent chance that, for large trucks (18 wheelers), and the really massive SUVs, plus some of the heavier large pickup trucks, the future will predominantly remain PHEV using some form of "green fuel" indefinitely, or at least for a quite a long while.
That would kinda suck, from the standpoint of carbon footprint. Because all those very heavy vehicles are huge carbon emitters and even "clean" fuels will still be spewing a lot of carbon into the atmosphere, right?
But I still think it's more likely than not, at least in the next 50 years or so. Unless something cleaner that isn't huge heavy batteries becomes viable in the meantime.
I'm not going down this rabbit hole with you. Comparing BD to Tesla is silly. You making the comparison shows how little you know about the goal of the Optimus project.
As long as you own the right EV, road trips are a pleasure. What's your EV road trip experience been?
YOU were just comparing the two companies (using factually untrue statements, along with supposition about an unreleased product’s pricing).
Making your last statement a real head scratcher, unless you’re okay with implicitly admitting you know little about the goal of the Optimus project. Can’t have it both ways and remain logically consistent.
So which is it? Were you being silly when comparing them, too?
Hey look, it's a Cyberstuck being pulled out by an ICE F150! If you need a Christmas tree, and it's snowing, leave the Cyberstuck at home!
With my plug in hybrid Tucson I've been averaging 110 miles per gallon of gas since I've had it (4 months). Enjoying the ride
Is calling an OTA software update a "recall" semantics or sensationalism?Fake news, it's Reuters!!!
Notice you have to read between the lines to see that the Autopilot system itself works just fine. The update is to address driver attention which "may" or "could" lead to distracted driving.
Tesla responded to the recent Washington Post hit piece re Autopilot. Context matters
It's official terminology. You and the other Teslarati trying to spin it as anything else is playing with semantics. And the post was not an article in WaPo. It was Reuters. Thanks for playing.
My wife is always helpful and texts me the news story of a Tesla recall so I know to take mine in
By definition, any software update like that needed to "patch" something on the scale Tesla did would be called a recall. Because of the size of vehicles it involves, they make what is called a recall filing. So the terminology used by Reuters and others is technically accurate.
A few years ago Honda had a software "recall" as well. It was a glitch with the backup camera, hardly anything vital to the actual driveability of their cars. It was simply a software patch but called a recall. Now, yes, you had to go to the dealer for the software patch but because Tesla is more technologically advanced, you can get the software patch without taking it to the dealer.
This is just Tesla people who tend to be uber sensitive of any criticism whining for the sake of whining.
A few years ago Honda had a software "recall" as well. It was a glitch with the backup camera, hardly anything vital to the actual driveability of their cars. It was simply a software patch but called a recall. Now, yes, you had to go to the dealer for the software patch but because Tesla is more technologically advanced, you can get the software patch without taking it to the dealer.
This is just Tesla people who tend to be uber sensitive of any criticism whining for the sake of whining.
I've honestly never seen anything like the incredible level of sensitivity exhibited by an apparently not insignificant number of Tesla owners. It was a safety recall because Tesla's systems aren't properly detecting and reacting when drivers are not remaining fully aware and with their hands on the wheel.
Which has led to accidents. Yes, in many or most cases, the drivers are at fault for not paying enough attention. However, the vehicle lulls drivers into a false sense of security and then the software glitches and that leads to these accidents (and apparently lots of near misses).
The entire concept behind partially automated systems like this is deeply flawed. I can't understand why it's allowed given how much it relies on a level of attention the very technology discourages. Not just Tesla, but any of these systems.
Get fully automated working correctly and that'll be fine. But this partial stuff is insane.
My phone and laptop have had several "recalls" too. I guess your content with the current, overall way our media works. I'm not. If that makes me whiny, so be it.
Nice analogy. Do your phone and laptop kill people when they malfunction?
You only whine about the media when it doesn't fit your narrative.