In spite of all the manufacturer's claims, Tesla's the real innovator

[smorgasbord]

In the meantime let's let the start-up company with a lot on its plate worry about the real innovation and quit moaning.

I agree, Tesla should worry about their real innovations, like the car-shaped key fob that's too big for normal key rings or retracting door handles that are harder to use. :wink:

Look, I get how disruptive technology gets adopted - by being better in some areas, even if not better in others. The early adopters choose the new thing because the area in which the disruptive technology is superior is more important to them than other areas. As the technology matures, it gets as good if not better in most areas - and this coupled with a shift in what areas people think are important makes the disruptive technolog replace the existing for the general population.

Tesla chose the market in which they wanted to compete. If Tesla wanted to focus on drivetrain and suspension innovations, then they needed to choose a market for which those are the overriding concerns. That's what they did successfully with Roadster, but the overall market is too small. I can see an argument that MSP competing against M5s is a market that's well suited for Tesla. But again, I think that market is too small for Tesla. So, how well does the equivalent Model S compete against a 535i or A6/A7 - and isn't that the market in which Tesla needs to be successful right now? And, doesn't that market highly value things like park distance sensors?

So what we're seeing in this thread is a example of what will be going on in the market. Will enough people value Tesla's electric drivetrain over the items normally found in comparable cars to make them successful?

 

[doug]

It would have to be innovative parking sensors, maybe using Lidar and projecting a 3D wire model of the surroundings onto the screen...

Autonomous Vehicles - Page 2

 

[mknox]

You not wanting or needing a feature does not mean that others can not want or need said feature, nor that they shouldn't expect the feature when it comes on other cars in the same price range.

I couldn't agree more with this statement. Nobody is arguing that the Tesla drivetrain and vehicle architecture is not innovative - it certainly is. But I do believe if they intend to compete in the BMW 5-series arena, then the car is lacking a number of "amenities" that are common and standard in this class.

 

[earthling]

I would expect that most if not all of the items that are normally standard on vehicles in this price range will start to be included in the not too distant future. Right now it's much more important that they're working on smoothing out the bigger concerns. As long as they have a certain amount of early adopters in the queue, they have the "luxury" of that cushion. It would be quite different if they had to compete today without a list of willing buyers.

Cheers =)

 

[Robert.Boston]

Tesla chose the market in which they wanted to compete. If Tesla wanted to focus on drivetrain and suspension innovations, then they needed to choose a market for which those are the overriding concerns. That's what they did successfully with Roadster, but the overall market is too small. I can see an argument that MSP competing against M5s is a market that's well suited for Tesla. But again, I think that market is too small for Tesla. So, how well does the equivalent Model S compete against a 535i or A6/A7 - and isn't that the market in which Tesla needs to be successful right now? And, doesn't that market highly value things like park distance sensors?

My thinking is that most of these high-tech gadgets on cars are an arms-race between the premium OEMs, hoping to gain a slight competitive advantage over otherwise hard-to-distinguish cars. I'm not convinced that consumers actually value many, or even most, of these gadgets very much, but this tech is what they've been told they ought to care about. By contrast, Tesla truly has distinguishing fundamentals.

That said, I agree that Tesla should and, most likely, will make these advanced options available, probably in a year or two. I think they were wise to focus on delivering the essentials (and, clearly, are having a few problems even there).

 

[dpeilow]

exactly

 

[smorgasbord]

I think they were wise to focus on delivering the essentials (and, clearly, are having a few problems even there).

None of the reported delivery issues have been attributed to the drivetrain nor suspension. So, one argument is that they clearly haven't focused enough on things other than the drivetrain and suspension. If I believed that Tesla would introduce heads-up display, adaptive cruise control, automatic parking, or electric folding mirrors within a year, I would wait for my car. But, I don't believe they will.

From what you say about the worth of gadgets, can I assume you're not getting the upgraded stereo, pano roof, nor tech package?