Favorite and Least Favorite Feature

[AudubonB]

X...
Least: Inefficient power consumption. Currently on a road trip through Montana and went over 600 wh/ml at high speeds / elevations through stretches. Wind drag and weight make it feel heavy when compared with the S.

I've responded to this in another thread, rather than gunking up this one: CHANGES in efficiency at speed relative to ICEs

 

[ohmman]

Yes, I feel your pain. I've given up on trying to train my X to open the trunk at a higher setting. I have lots more room for the trunk to open, so until Tesla updates the software to be less conservative, I've resigned myself to manually pushing it higher each time.

Have you guys submitted this issue to Tesla?

My submission looks like this:

Currently, the Model X liftgate operates under the same overhead restrictions as the falcon wing doors. That is, when the vehicle is in "indoor" mode, the liftgate only partially opens. Currently, the only way to work around this is to open the falcon wing doors completely in the space, and then hit the "Open fully in this location" function. However, there are scenarios where this is not possible - marginally limited overhead space, a beam across the falcon wing doors but clear space above the liftgate, etc.

My preference would be to have geolocated fixed opening heights for both the liftgate and the falcon wing doors. My garage is such that the falcon wing doors just nearly open all the way, but not quite. Therefore, I cannot override the overhead restriction, and I'm left with both doors and the liftgate opening much lower than desired. If I could raise them all and set that height as standard for the particular location, it would be ideal.

A side workaround would be to allow the liftgate to work as the Model S does. Perhaps give the owner the ability to decouple the liftgate height from the falcon wing door sensor, and just set a max opening height when in "indoor" mode. Or, as above, geolocate only that item and not the falcon wing doors.

Thanks for the consideration, and let me know if you have any questions.

 

[vandacca]

Have you guys submitted this issue to Tesla?

My submission looks like this:

Good point, we should be helping Tesla out with these issues. I just assumed they were already working on it. Doesn't the Model-S already have a geo-fence opening position for the trunk?

I see that the problem may be that you can program the trunk to open lower, but not necessary to open higher than it deems safe. From the Model-X Owner's Manual:

 

[Cyclone]

As for least favorite, I guess I'll say the charge port location. Having the port near the front like on a LEAF is more convenient both at home (for sharing a cord between two cars) and at public charging spots (don't have to back in).

I grant that you expressed your personal opinion. Isn't this really a problem of the charger installation and not the port location? I occasionally have to fuss with a ChargePoint that isn't long enough when I parallel park. That said, I would be thoroughly annoyed each and every day if the port was up front as I have always backed into parking spaces (even in the ICE). Also, in my garage, I only have enough room to squeeze by the front of the car and my garage door and often just open the garage door to get around the car. But then, that is my personal use-case scenario too.

 

[kevinMXY]

Pro: Never needing to pump gas for a sporty crossover that seats six.
Con: Windshield glair. There must be a better (non-reflective) coating that can be applied to the climate-control speaker-grill that spans the full width of the windshield.

Believe or not, this issue has not been resolved after 7 years with the new refreshed model X.