FSD may require a hardware upgrade...

[u00mem9]

Tesla will always be remembered as the first auto company to sell a fully autonomous vehicle.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like they will be the first to deliver an autonomous vehicle.

The evidence is now overwhelming that when announced, Tesla was completely full of sugar about their development progress and their knowledge of what would be required to support self-driving. Who knows what hardware and additional sensors will ultimately need to be retrofitted to these cars when they finally have a reliable system working. Not Tesla. They are still working to recover to the Oct. 2015 state of Autopilot operation.

 

[ev-now]

In the meanwhile, I'd just be happy if they took their focus off of 0-60 times, and focused a bit more on reliability, service center wait times, and repair costs.

Amen. But I got royally flamed for that opinion already.

 

[ev-now]

Autopark, auto high-beams, auto wipers and more don't currently work well enough to be relied upon, but are listed as features.

Autopark - agreed, total failure for me (AP1, Jan 2015 ex-factory)
Auto High-Beams - work 99% of the time, and can reasonably explain the other 1% (same as Volvo and Audi auto-beams IME)
Auto Wipers - we don't get that much rain in CO, but seems to work, somewhat patchy in light snow (same as every auto-wiper system I've ever come across).

Interested in what you are experiencing with these - not defending anything, just stating my experience.

Before I bought CPO I saw summon to the front door, on private drive, traffic light and stop sign claims ... The absence of the last two significantly reducing the value of TACC or AP.

Hope Tesla delivers a passable FSD experience to those who paid for it, and I fully expect there to be different hardware required (as I've said multiple times before Elon's quoted statement). I don't think it will be just the 'brain' though, which I'd guess could be easily swapped IF it's just raw compute power and same becomes available in the right form factor. I still think new/revised sensors will be necessary.

Just as someone said launch times sell, so does the dream of FSD.

 

[Shorty]

I think that people are reading a lot into an off the cuff comment made by Elon. If at some point a second CPU is required and the car is not already provisioned for it then I would expect that Tesla would provide the necessary upgrade for those people who paid for FSD. It is not like the extra FSD fee doesn't pay for it and then some anyways.

I was an original sig owner before I upgraded to an AP2 car and there were lots of examples over the past 4+ years where hardware needed to be replaced or upgraded due to early design issues and Tesla did the work free of charge every time.

You have to wonder whether people who immediately jump down Tesla's throat on every rumour or comment actually own cars or are just here because they shorted the stock and want to try and make some money by raising a stink..

 

[SeminoleFSU]

Elon had a disclaimer related to regulatory approval. If the current hardware is not found to be suitable for government approval of FSD, he could always fall back on that. But that's the fine print. I think if FSD is not enabled within the next 6 months, you will see far more people rebelling in the public than you did when Tesla sold us P85Ds with 228 hp less than what was advertised.

How about saying the batteries were 85kwh but were actually 81.x or whatever? The fanboy types will say it delivers on the EPA range, etc but Tesla STILL advertised a capacity they did not deliver on. To me that's a slam dunk. I wouldn't mind if my battery was 84.9 but to have it be 81 or whatever is a flat out lie. I don't mind them keeping some in reserve for brick or degredation protection so that my actual available is 81, but the battery under the floor should be an 85kWh if you're going to advertise it and badge it as such. Infuriating

 

[ev-now]

I can almost guarantee you that the level of FSD in the demo video will not be available in the next 6 months.

If the recent stats about FSD miles since those demos were filmed is even close, and based on current progress to get AP2 parity - I cannot see AP2 exceeding AP1 significantly in 6 months, let alone FSD.

I think the big disclaimer is probably time - Elon can say all he likes in the press - there's the regulatory requirement disclaimer. So provided they are making steady progress towards it - it may not be possible to claim they failed to deliver it. Of course if they come out as say the AP2 hardware is not sufficient, which was the start of the thread - well that's different unless they promise to provide the upgrade just as soon as approval is achieved.

 

[calisnow]

I don't believe that the Tesla FSD video(s) had the driver limiting his route to only divided freeways before engaging FSD. I think they even showed some local driving in one of the videos.

In those videos, they state the driver is present with his hands touching the wheel for regulatory purposes only (California). They don't seem to signal to consumers that there will be this kind of limitation you allude to (solely due to hardware). Now, there are myriad facts that could come into play. I just think if its proven that Tesla should have provided better hardware to support their promises and claims -- then they should provide that to buyers free of charge to avoid defending themselves as to allegations they are misrepresenting to consumers what they are buying.

Again, not an attorney and I know nothing of torts. But since this is cutting edge tech, is there any legal principle which states "Company X promised Y with the best information available at the time. The following scientific experts told them it was possible (trot out AI researchers in Tesla's defense) - they did their best. Later the government said "no dice" - but Tesla tried."

 

[Electricfan]

They'd have to offer a buyback as an option as well as I'm sure some folks bought for the sole reason that they'd have an FSD car. If Tesla never delivers on that, refunding the FSD fee won't be enough.

Nobody who bought an AP1 car got "on ramp to off ramp" autopilot. We got white-knuckle hands on wheel ready to save your life at any moment autopilot. I can see Tesla saying, hey, the car drives itself but you have to be ready to take over at any moment. For certain they aren't going to offer buyback - the expense would be in the hundreds of millions - no way in hell they'll ever do that. I agree with you if they don't deliver FSD for real, refunding the fee won't be enough, but they won't even go that far, I don't believe.

 

[sorka]

How about saying the batteries were 85kwh but were actually 81.x or whatever? The fanboy types will say it delivers on the EPA range, etc but Tesla STILL advertised a capacity they did not deliver on. To me that's a slam dunk. I wouldn't mind if my battery was 84.9 but to have it be 81 or whatever is a flat out lie. I don't mind them keeping some in reserve for brick or degredation protection so that my actual available is 81, but the battery under the floor should be an 85kWh if you're going to advertise it and badge it as such. Infuriating

The problem with that one is there are no damages. The the single and dual motor, and performance dual motor cars were all advertised with an EPA rated range based on a full charge and they achieve that mileage under the EPA tested conditions.

My P85D was advertised at 253 rated miles. I have very little difficulty achieving that as long as it's not too cold, raining, and I don't exceed the speed limit by 5 mph.

 

[bob_p]

The delay in getting AP 2.0/EAP to provide at least AP 1.0 functionality is understandable, because they had to adapt the software to use data from different sensors. Remember, it took a year after AP 1.0 hardware was introduced before the software was activated - it's likely AP 2.0 will be activated to AP 1.0 functionality much faster than that - likely in the next few months, though longer than Tesla had predicted.

That's different than the situation with FSD. Tesla has stated that every car manufactured since October has hardware that will eventually support FSD. The website states FSD will be activated when the software has passed validation and they have regulatory approval. They even talk about using a self-driving Tesla for car sharing, and that using the car for revenue purposes would require running on the Tesla network. They've very clearly committed to having driverless self-driving - not an ultra EAP. Nowhere does Tesla mention the possibility that the hardware may not be capable enough to support FSD.

Clearly there are risks in getting FSD working. The sensors may be inadequate, requiring either replacements to all or some of the AP 2.0 sensors, or adding more sensors. If that becomes necessary, those updates could range from easy to impractical.

If the NVidia processor isn't enough - Tesla should be able to do an in-place upgrade, either to a more capable NVidia processor - or Tesla could chose a different processor, such as the custom processor they are rumored to be developing. It seems reasonable that a Tesla-developed processor would be plug compatible with the AP 2.0 hardware.

By accepting $3K for the "Full Self-Driving Capability" and with the combination of their marketing claims that all cars with AP 2.0 will eventually support FSD and the statements on the order page, Tesla may have boxed themselves into a corner - committing Tesla to make the hardware work, and if it doesn't, to upgrade it to deliver what the customer paid for.

We have an S 100D in production now, and selected the FSD option. While the extra range of the 100D is useful, it was the combination of the range and the hardware that will eventually support FSD that convinced us to buy our second Model S. And other customers are likely in the same position, where the FSD option was a major factor in their purchase decision. So if Tesla determines the AP 2.0 hardware can't support FSD, they will likely have quite a few customers that will be looking for more than a $3K refund for what they spent on the FSD option.

 

[calisnow]

Tesla will always be remembered as the first auto company to sell a fully autonomous vehicle. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like they will be the first to deliver an autonomous vehicle. The evidence is now overwhelming that when announced, Tesla was completely full of sugar about their development progress and their knowledge of what would be required to support self-driving. Who knows what hardware and additional sensors will ultimately need to be retrofitted to these cars when they finally have a reliable system working. Not Tesla. They are still working to recover to the Oct. 2015 state of Autopilot operation.

At the risk of being pedantic - if you don't understand the fundamental difference between Mobileye and Nvidia it's easy to think Tesla is behind. Nvidia's system learns from scratch. Mobileye came with a pre-baked set of items it could recognize. Nevertheless the Mobileye-based AP 1 hardware released in Oct 2014 was not enabled for 12 MONTHS after the hardware shipped. Do you have an autopilot Tesla? If so - do you remember what 7.0 was like back in October 2015? It was very sketchy compared to what we have today - February 2017. It is pretty darn rock solid now - but it's been almost 2.5 years since AP 1.0's fleet learning first began and the cars were running shadow mode.

AP 2.0 hardware has been in the wild - running a brand new neural network that was essentially an infant and is designed by Nvidia to learn from scratch - for less than 4 months. 2.5 years vs 4 months. And yet it is iterating and progressing far faster than AP 1.0 did. Which it should - it's a much more powerful computer.

Your sig says you joined in June 2016 - which means you were not around this neighborhood to watch all the crying and moaning folks did while AP 1.0 was being developed. As soon as it was released - everybody went silent.

Tell me what other company will be ahead of Tesla in a marketed product 24 months from now? Who? Mercedes? Really? What massive fleet does Mercedes have on the roads finding corner cases for them now? Tesla is adding 25,000 cars a quarter to worldwide roads gathering data.

24 months from now Tesla will likely release Autopilot 3.0 - but by then even if the competition has released a fleet learning program - Tesla will have billions of miles accumulated on Nvidia's platform, all of which will be used to enhance the performance of the third generation.

I think Tesla has this game on lock - they're accelerating away from the competition.

 

[calisnow]

Nobody who bought an AP1 car got "on ramp to off ramp" autopilot. We got white-knuckle hands on wheel ready to save your life at any moment autopilot. I can see Tesla saying, hey, the car drives itself but you have to be ready to take over at any moment. For certain they aren't going to offer buyback - the expense would be in the hundreds of millions - no way in hell they'll ever do that. I agree with you if they don't deliver FSD for real, refunding the fee won't be enough, but they won't even go that far, I don't believe.

Bull-honky. @Electricfan you've been moaning about autopilot 1.0 for what - 18 months now? Always trying to tell us how crazy unsafe it is. White knuckle? You're so totally full of it! Are you driving the same autopilot the rest of us are in 2017? "White knuckle"? I'm calling you out son - I'll fly to Houston at my own expense - or I'll drive my Tesla there - and buy you dinner. Then let's go driving in your "white knuckle" Tesla and take some video for everybody here to see of just how unsafe and heart-attack inducing your Tesla is.

 

[calisnow]

@Electricfan - I'll grant you the point about off-ramp to off-ramp. That was not delivered and I don't see how it safely ever could be because the car can't look behind it more than 16 feet. But the performance is just off the charts amazing and stress-reducing now when used within its design limits. It makes multi-hundred mile drives no more tiring than a 5 minute trip to the supermarket. You must have very very sensitive nerves compared to the rest of us. I suppose you think the 40% claimed accident reduction rate from the NHTSA is false as well right?

 

[cookpwr]

@boonedocks @sorka @Reeler and others on this thread questioning how Tesla currently defines FSD. Here's exactly how Tesla defines it. Pretty crystal clear

• "AT LEAST twice as good as a human driver"
• "Navigate Urban Streets"
• "Manage complex intersections"

 

[MP3Mike]

AP 2.0 hardware has been in the wild - running a brand new neural network that was essentially an infant and is designed by Nvidia to learn from scratch

No, from what Tesla has said the software is 100% developed by Tesla, they didn't buy the Nvidia software kit. They only bought the hardware. (Which is why Elon said that they could run AP2.0 software on other hardware like ATI and Intel.)

 

[Drone Flyer]

Tesla would be sued to Kingdom Come if they failed to install the necessary hardware free of charge to customers who bought FSD. They'd better budget for that now just in case.

Where is Kingdom Come?
I wonder if it has Superchargers! They'll be needed for all the AP 2 folks!

 

[Nietschy]

Bull-honky. @Electricfan you've been moaning about autopilot 1.0 for what - 18 months now? Always trying to tell us how crazy unsafe it is. White knuckle? You're so totally full of it! Are you driving the same autopilot the rest of us are in 2017? "White knuckle"? I'm calling you out son - I'll fly to Houston at my own expense - or I'll drive my Tesla there - and buy you dinner. Then let's go driving in your "white knuckle" Tesla and take some video for everybody here to see of just how unsafe and heart-attack inducing your Tesla is.

just try out truck lust on your own, and you know how it feels like to save your life with a crank on the wheel. the car decides to change lanes in not much more than a second.
be ready in a maximum of about 1 second or see the flatbed go with the debriss.

I understand him very much!

btw: you are kind of rude in stating your point of view.

 

[oktane]

I can guarantee you that no "fine print" will absolve Tesla of their responsibility to deliver on their promise. I'm being patient and waiting to get what was promised to be delivered to me me December 2016, namely enhanced autopilot and soon thereafter FSD. Not delivering on this in a timely fashion will prove fraud. Does the FSD video Tesla actually exist and do what it claims, or is it just a carefully choreographed video lie?

I'm giving Tesla the benefit of the doubt, which is becoming harder to do as time goes on. Fortunately, we are getting some indication via Elon's tweets that at least AP1 parity will be achieved with 1-2 months. If not, Tesla will by buying my car back, whether they like it or not. Refunding what I paid for EAP/FSD will NOT be sufficient. I'm sure others will agree.

 

[calisnow]

@oktane - they'll deliver but I would not expect ultimate "maturation" of the reliability of this software suite on current cars for 2-2.5 years. I think we will get a steady drip of gradual improvement - just based on what happened with AP 1.0. This hardware is much more powerful but the task is also much more complex.

 

[DJ 240V]

Let me be clear: I am an attorney and have sued many many companies for consumer fraud back when I started. This is about as open/shut as they come. Tesla can't decide how to make a consumer whole. As @sorka stated -- many consumers bought a Tesla because of FSD. It was the feature that compelled the entire purchase. Putting aside a slam dunk consumer fraud claim -- even under a breach of contract theory, the buyer is entitled to be made entirely whole if they can prove they would've bought a different car and FSD was what pushed them towards a Tesla. Tesla made a contract and despite what people think about Tesla's "fine print" -- a hardware limitation isn't going to cut it as an excuse for a material breach.

Throw in a slam dunk consumer fraud case and Tesla really better deliver free of charge or they will drown in litigation. Remember, I used to do these lawsuits as a young attorney because attorneys fees are baked in to most state consumer fraud laws. Nothing better than a slam dunk case where the other side fights (its like those Chinese finger traps -- the more you struggle the worse it becomes).

Lets just assume Tesla will eat whatever cost there is (remember if its in the future, the tech cost will drop as compared to present value). Tesla gets $100k+ at 30+% margins from us now, so it can't be that big of a deal to them to upgrade purchasers for free to avoid breaching a contract.

Though I did not buy the car with FSD option I fully intended to upgrade when it was ready . Will call you if we need a class action