Since we're citing CR, here are some quotes
CR somewhat famously tests the very first version then ignores all future updates.
For example as you cite they tested features in 2019 and apparently never bothered to update their descriptions of them even though they, especially NoA, have been through dozens of updates and improvements since.
The last one is especially funny though, they write " We find that they work inconsistently. For example, Traffic Light and Stop Sign Control is designed to come to a complete stop at all stoplights"
So...it's inconsistent in that it
does the same thing for every light? That's just bad writing.
Which is the opposite of inconsistent.... and also not quite how the system has worked for some time since it'll now go through green lights either with the beta or in wide release with a follow car.
They've since mentioned they're luddite old people who have trouble keeping up with changes though- specifically saying
CR said:
Covering Tesla's software and technology is increasingly tricky. The brand's cars receive regular updates, so some cars may have updates that others don't yet have.
If your mag is incapable of keeping up with changes to a product, maybe don't try and cover the product?
CR somewhat famously has an anti-tesla bias though-like where they wrote a story about how "easy" is it to operate AP without someone in the drivers seat that involved multiple ridiculous steps nobody could ever do by accident.... or where they complained for years Tesla sucks because they don't use a camera for driver monitoring- so Tesla did an OTA update to enable exactly what CR wanted, and CRs response was "OMG! A CAMERA?? PRIVACY CONCERNS!!!"..... mind you it had praised camera use by everyone NOT named Tesla....
So the fact they still were forced to admit Tesla was #1 for actual performance and capabilities is pretty signficant.
The problem with this list is that it is basically ranking the best of the worst.
I mean... ok I guess?
Pretty glass half empty perspective, but at least unlike a few folks here you accept the rankings
. My gripe is only Tesla advertises full self driving and charges $12k for a product that doesn’t do so
But again, for nearly 3 years now the product they "call" that is
explicitly described to you during your purchase as only promising ONE additional, undelivered, thing... which is L2 city street driving.
Something that
exists but is in narrow beta testing and (obviously) not finished yet.
It doesn't promise you some magical L5 system that is imaginary.
You're getting hung up on the name.
But Happy Meals don't necessarily make everyone happy. Diaper Genies don't grant wishes.
Radio flyers neither receive radio nor fly.
The lack of FSD transferability between Tesla vehicles is a real swift kick to the tenders.
Can you cite a bunch of other car options that are "transferable" to new cars?
I can't think of... well... any....
That includes all the other L2 driving systems other car makers charge for. They stay with the car.
Tesla has already offered folks an option who don't think they'll get 12k of value out of it. A $199/mo subscription you can turn on/off month to month.
Translation: TACC sucks. I mean seriously, you're right. It's in the manual
It's also in the manual for
every other car brand with a similar feature
It's inherent to the technology though degree varies from one version to another- and as pointed out, with half a dozen sources, other brands are
worse.
So the premise some have in here it's a "tesla" problem remains factually nonsensical.