Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

2021 Refresh Model S Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Wood can look modern.

Not all woods look modern.

Tesla wood does not look modern. Most automotive "woods" look pretty cheesy.

I would totally rock this wooden espresso machine
.
Wooden-Espresso-Machine-463645.jpg


Colored differently, would look good in this kitchen.

33-modern-style-cozy-wooden-kitchen-design-ideas-comfortable-modren-outstanding-15.jpg

Don't get me wrong, I love wood. Bring it on in a home, but not big on it in a car. Carbon fibre all the way. (unless you own a Bentley...)

The odd part is there is all sorts of furniture using wood. Modern, luxurious, contemporary, chairs and sofas. But is wood used in car seats,? No, just dash and door trim and consoles. :confused:

+1

Carbon fiber is the new chrome. Used to be exotic and expensive to produce, so it came to resemble some expression of status.

Then they figured out how to imitate it with cheap-ass plastic or greatly reduce the cost through other techniques, and it ended up everywhere, with 90% of applications just looking tacky.

I'll admit, all that fake and much of the aftermarket cf looks cheap.

But imagine that spoiler on the Plaid+ in wood? I don't think so.
 
So you think Tesla's had the time and money to spend '7-figures' apiece to update the Model 3/Y headlights (to the projectors) and update the Model Y taillights (redesigned brake LEDs and amber turn signals) - lights which have been out for a far shorter period of time, barely half a year in the case of the Model Y taillights - while they don't have the time or money to update them on the S, a car that's been around since 2012 which they just completely refreshed otherwise? Right...

Yes, I do.

The changes are likely internal to the Model 3/Y lighting, which minimizes the cost of changes since the molds for the exterior remain the same. What you're likely seeing with those two models is an attempt to fix a mistake--different lights were likely required for different markets. With these changes I'll posit several advantages ensue:

1. Use of exactly the same lighting assemblies for the entire globe. Lower cost can result due to increased volume. (Regional differences likely now addressed via software, most likely.)

2. Improved performance, very important for the IIHS lighting tests which require good scores to achieve their coveted "Best Pick+" awards.

3. An emphasis on the extremely high-volume models is far more important than more niche products like the Model S and X.

All that said, I would not be surprised if some internal changes may have been made to Model S and X lighting to incorporate some of the technological advances over the past nine years. They key for Tesla is/was to retain very similar or identical sizing so as to use the same stamping for the surrounding body metal, and the same molds for the lighting exterior. Making changes there can easily be very expensive without any real, measurable benefit, aka, "Change for the sake of change."

IMHO.
 
Wow... Is it still okay to have a hamburger??

Well, the facts of the matter are really quite clear, but perhaps you've "missed" them because cognitive dissonance is real? (Even among Tesla owners, sadly.)

If it's made out of the flesh of a murdered, sentient being, then the answerer is "no."

If it's made from plants, then the answer is "yes." (Examples: Beyond Meat, Impossible Burger, Boca Burger, and too many more to list.)

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.”
--Neil deGrasse Tyson

"Science doesn't care what you believe."
--The Internet
 
  • Love
Reactions: tkizzy and MarcG
Yes, I do.

The changes are likely internal to the Model 3/Y lighting, which minimizes the cost of changes since the molds for the exterior remain the same. What you're likely seeing with those two models is an attempt to fix a mistake--different lights were likely required for different markets. With these changes I'll posit several advantages ensue:

1. Use of exactly the same lighting assemblies for the entire globe. Lower cost can result due to increased volume. (Regional differences likely now addressed via software, most likely.)

2. Improved performance, very important for the IIHS lighting tests which require good scores to achieve their coveted "Best Pick+" awards.

3. An emphasis on the extremely high-volume models is far more important than more niche products like the Model S and X.

All that said, I would not be surprised if some internal changes may have been made to Model S and X lighting to incorporate some of the technological advances over the past nine years. They key for Tesla is/was to retain very similar or identical sizing so as to use the same stamping for the surrounding body metal, and the same molds for the lighting exterior. Making changes there can easily be very expensive without any real, measurable benefit, aka, "Change for the sake of change."

IMHO.

It's honestly mind-blowing how far people will go to defend Tesla for using decade old parts and decade old designs. To actually try and spin it as 'they would've done it but they can't afford to!' is... wow.

You're misinterpreting that I'm looking for Tesla to completely redo the sheetmetal and have new shape lights. No. Use the same damn housing and put a diffuser over the LEDs. Replace the reflector beams with the LED projector used in the 3/Y. Make the same internal changes that they've already done to the other models.

1. I agree the Y taillight changes were done in the interest of homogenizing parts around the world. The Model S and X still use a different taillight assembly in North America and the RoW markets. If this is a change that benefits Tesla when made to the Y, I'd love to hear why it would suddenly be an impossibility for the S and X?

2. The Model 3, pre-projector LED headlights already had an IIHS 'Good' rating and an IIHS Top Pick+ rating. Meanwhile, the Model S headlights have an IIHS 'Poor' rating, and does not have a Top Pick rating. Which of these two looks like it needs 'improved performance' to you?
(with that said, having owned a 3, S and X, I would bet that the X headlights would score Poor as well if tested)

3. The niche products that weren't too niche to get a completely redesigned interior and new bumper moldings, but too niche to get new lights?

Given that the lights still share the same part numbers and are visually and functionally completely identical, no, I don't see any technological advances integrated. Internal changes that benefit manufacturing efficiency or reliability are not what anyone is discussing here
 
It's honestly mind-blowing how far people will go to defend Tesla for using decade old parts and decade old designs. To actually try and spin it as 'they would've done it but they can't afford to!' is... wow.

You're misinterpreting that I'm looking for Tesla to completely redo the sheetmetal and have new shape lights. No. Use the same damn housing and put a diffuser over the LEDs. Replace the reflector beams with the LED projector used in the 3/Y. I am advocating for the same internal light changes that they've done to the other models.

1. I agree the Y taillight changes were done in the interest of homogenizing parts around the world. The Model S and X still use a different taillight assembly in North America and the RoW markets. If this is a change that benefits Tesla when made to the Y, I'd love to hear why it would suddenly be an impossibility for the S and X?

2. The Model 3, pre-projector LED headlights already had an IIHS 'Good' rating and an IIHS Top Pick+ rating. Meanwhile, the Model S headlights have an IIHS 'Poor' rating, and does not have a Top Pick rating. Which of these two looks like it needs 'improved performance' to you?
(with that said, having owned a 3, S and X, I would bet that the X headlights would score Poor as well if tested)

3. The niche products that weren't too niche to get a completely redesigned interior and new bumper moldings, but too niche to get new lights?

Given that the lights still share the same part numbers and are visually and functionally completely identical, no, I don't see any technological advances integrated. Internal changes that benefit manufacturing efficiency or reliability are not what anyone is discussing here

I'm not defending his position. However I do want to say, it's not as simple as you think. Lighting is highly, highly regulated. Getting a new light certified is an extremely expensive process, even more so than simply designing and manufacturing the light itself.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: TSLA Pilot
I'm not defending his position. However I do want to say, it's not as simple as you think. Lighting is highly, highly regulated. Getting a new light certified is an extremely expensive process, even more so than simply designing and manufacturing the light itself.

This is an argument I would absolutely buy - if they hadn't done all those changes to the 3 and Y lighting equipment recently. Tesla is no longer the tiny manufacturer running on fumes and barely scraping it through the quarter anymore. There simply is no excuse for your $35k bread and butter having superior lighting equipment than your premium product, particularly after this premium product's just undergone a significant update.

Perhaps I'm just jaded to be getting a fifth Model S with the same damn taillights again :) I've been spoiled with the excellent headlights on my Model 3 and a compromise shouldn't be necessary when buying a new car for twice the price.
 
Last edited:
Well, the facts of the matter are really quite clear, but perhaps you've "missed" them because cognitive dissonance is real? (Even among Tesla owners, sadly.)

If it's made out of the flesh of a murdered, sentient being, then the answerer is "no."

If it's made from plants, then the answer is "yes." (Examples: Beyond Meat, Impossible Burger, Boca Burger, and too many more to list.)

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.”
--Neil deGrasse Tyson

"Science doesn't care what you believe."
--The Internet

Sorry - I didn't realize you were serious...
 
I still hope that Tesla put the Model X style tail lights on the Model S (just to be coherent with the rest of the lineup). And as for the interior, they could have chosen Alcantara or a matte black or white aluminium instead of the wood (for the non-Plaid).
Other than that, it remains a great looking car.
 
I still hope that Tesla put the Model X style tail lights on the Model S (just to be coherent with the rest of the lineup). And as for the interior, they could have chosen Alcantara or a matte black or white aluminium instead of the wood (for the non-Plaid).
Other than that, it remains a great looking car.
I would love to have a brushed aluminum option instead of wood. Most likely, we'll wrap the wood initially and eventually swap out the decor once the carbon fiber parts are available.
 
I would love to have a brushed aluminum option instead of wood. Most likely, we'll wrap the wood initially and eventually swap out the decor once the carbon fiber parts are available.

Right? To me, this looks fabulous: There is no materials that I would prefer than black leather, black alcantara, carbon fibre, and augmented by a little brushed aluminum for contrast.

35516B8E-EA89-4831-BEA1-59FEC916B1D2.jpeg
57E2E4D4-E72F-494A-997F-D88BD6DFCB88.jpeg
 
Right? To me, this looks fabulous: There is no materials that I would prefer than black leather, black alcantara, carbon fibre, and augmented by a little brushed aluminum for contrast.

View attachment 641395 View attachment 641396
I like carbon fiber and have it coming on the plaid+. But I ask in all seriousness: is Tesla's CF trim real, or does it have the relationship of typical automakers' wood trim to real wood. I ask because I saw some posts years ago where the CF spoiler on Model S showed wear for some people just from grit in the air stream as if it was a printed layer with no resistance or hardness. I would love CF but I want it to be real woven CF.

Separately, I think real brushed aluminum looks very good, even though it is prone to scratching.

Finally, one interesting look that's kind of retro is engine-turned aluminum, although I think that is sometimes faked too:


panelindash.jpg
 
But I ask in all seriousness: is Tesla's CF trim real, or does it have the relationship of typical automakers' wood trim to real wood. I ask because I saw some posts years ago where the CF spoiler on Model S showed wear for some people just from grit in the air stream as if it was a printed layer with no resistance or hardness. I would love CF but I want it to be real woven CF.

View attachment 641436

Ive had the carbon fiber trim in my 2013 P85 start to fade during my ownership of the vehicle. and the spoiler on that model s and my current 2019 model 3 both faded as well.
 
I like carbon fiber and have it coming on the plaid+. But I ask in all seriousness: is Tesla's CF trim real,

Yes, it is real carbon fibre.

Ive had the carbon fiber trim in my 2013 P85 start to fade during my ownership of the vehicle. and the spoiler on that model s and my current 2019 model 3 both faded as well.

Well real paint fades too; you still have to wax/ceramic coat the carbon fibre just like the paint.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: jaguar36