Ingenext Boost Modules [aftermarket]

[M109Rider]

de ‘ole shakedown disguised as safety trick. This can be debated ad infinitum, but the fact of the matter is if you think they’re locking things down purely out of concern for safety, I have a bridge to sell you.

I would imagine that a car NOT functioning as designed, (due to a software hack), that runs on software is absolutely a great candidate for a safety issue. If you think otherwise, you’re lying to yourself to justify something you want....

 

[Sam1]

I don't, nor does anyone else honest as far as I'm concerned. 0-60 measurements should be from a STOP. If you wait until the car has moved a foot, you're not measuring 0-anything anymore.

You may want to tell road and track and car and driver, and basically everyone else who actually works in the industry that you specifically don't, so they need to retract their previous decades of results.

I'll help you get started with the mission -

 

[run-the-joules]

You may want to tell road and track and car and driver, and basically everyone else who actually works in the industry that you specifically don't, so they need to retract their previous decades of results.

I'll help you get started with the mission -

View attachment 546333

Cool. If they're willing to be collectively dishonest, so be it.

That first article says it all:

"In the interest of full disclosure, we'll be publishing the one-foot-rollout time of every tested vehicle so you can add it to the acceleration times to arrive at true zero-to-X measurements." If a measurement is not true, it must be false.

I'll stick with true.

 

[SammichLover]

You may want to tell road and track and car and driver...

That's already been covered here. Yes, the magazines that are in the business of 'middleman for the hype-machine' do publish the numbers that way. Because WOOT! it sounds sexier.

I suggest for clarity and benefit of ALL; In the future here, where the default is to more precise, accurate measurements methodology, you should expect to see values without the 1' rollout subtracted, and if you feel you must list numbers with the 1' foot rollout subtract that you also explicitly note you're using the different standard.

 

[Sam1]

Cool. If they're willing to be collectively dishonest, so be it.

That first article says it all:

"In the interest of full disclosure, we'll be publishing the one-foot-rollout time of every tested vehicle so you can add it to the acceleration times to arrive at true zero-to-X measurements." If a measurement is not true, it must be false.

I'll stick with true.

Read it slowly and out loud to yourself.

They will be posting the times using the industry standard one foot roll out moving forward, plus they will be recalculating all the previous times, so you can make an apples to apples comparison. It states it right there in the paragraph that you were paraphrasing, you just happen to leave out the part that contradicted your assertion.

 

[run-the-joules]

Read it slowly and out loud to yourself.

They will be posting the times using the industry standard one foot roll out moving forward, plus they will be recalculating all the previous times, so you can make an apples to apples comparison. It states it right there in the paragraph that you were paraphrasing, you just happen to leave out the part that contradicted your assertion.

I didn't paraphrase a god damned thing, I copied and pasted verbatim. They are saying if you add the rollout time (which they're ignoring) to the acceleration time they're going to use, you get the TRUE zero-to-X measurement.

Let's break it down to help you:


"We'll be publishing the one-foot-rollout time of every tested vehicle"

This is the number they're ignoring going forward. Let's call it "Variable F"

"so you can add it "

Hopefully you don't need this explained.


"to the acceleration times"

the artificial number they're going to use. Let's call it "Variable A"


" to arrive at true zero-to-X measurements."


Key word: TRUE.

So we can add F + A, which will equal true zero-to-x. If you must add a non-zero, non-negative value to something to get the truth, then the thing in question is obviously less than true.



Am I being a pedant? Yes. But that's what statistics are supposed to be for.

 

[cypho]

Ah. So I did miss that.
Could that be, because they want to ensure the software and hardware repairs are in Sync for safety reasons ?

I know for sure that malfunctions, accidents, or breakdowns, resulting from Software Hardware conflict mods will be blamed on Tesla.
If you owned Tesla, would you want that headache. ?

Nahh, they just like charging 2x-3x as much for labor than the neighborhood mechanic charges.

Tesla's cars are no more at risk from 3rd party repairs than anyone else's cars. They are actually 100x simpler(from a replacing broken part and putting things back together point of view) than a traditional ICE car. Mechanics and DIY savvy owners have had no problem re-assembling ICE cars for the last 100 years. It is absurd to think that somehow the far simpler EV poses some sort of new, unsurmountable challenge for 3rd party repair.

Why do I need to pay Tesla $200/hour to install a part that I purchased FROM TESLA? It's not like there are any 3rd party manufacturers making aftermarket replacement parts that are questionable compatibility. The parts all just plug in and bolt into place. Plugs and bolts are not rocket science to install.

And before someone jumps in with autopilot. From a hardware point of view, Tesla's system is no more complicated to assemble/repair than the driver assistance systems in any other brand's cars. And no other auto company prevents 3rd party repair the way Tesla does.

 

[Sam1]

I didn't paraphrase a god damned thing, I copied and pasted verbatim. They are saying if you add the rollout time (which they're ignoring) to the acceleration time they're going to use, you get the TRUE zero-to-X measurement.

Let's break it down to help you:


"We'll be publishing the one-foot-rollout time of every tested vehicle"

This is the number they're ignoring going forward. Let's call it "Variable F"

"so you can add it "

Hopefully you don't need this explained.


"to the acceleration times"

the artificial number they're going to use. Let's call it "Variable A"


" to arrive at true zero-to-X measurements."


Key word: TRUE.

So we can add F + A, which will equal true zero-to-x. If you must add a non-zero, non-negative value to something to get the truth, then the thing in question is obviously less than true.



Am I being a pedant? Yes. But that's what statistics are supposed to be for.

Sometimes people go to great lengths to try to prove a point, and they end up searching for technicalities just out of a refusal to accept they were wrong.

The information is there, you can granulate it as deep as you want, but you're ignoring the simple fact that 1 foot rollout is the industry standard, they state it is, R&T states it is, car manufacturers state it is, and that C&D didn't do it previously simply because they didn't have the technical capability of doing so. Now they do, and they're on par with the industry.

Search for all the technicalities, and create theoretical formulas all you want. Still doesn't mean a single thing other than you're dumping an irrelevant word salad onto the internet.

 

[M109Rider]

Nahh, they just like charging 2x-3x as much for labor than the neighborhood mechanic charges.

Tesla's cars are no more at risk from 3rd party repairs than anyone else's cars. They are actually 100x simpler(from a replacing broken part and putting things back together point of view) than a traditional ICE car. Mechanics and DIY savvy owners have had no problem re-assembling ICE cars for the last 100 years. It is absurd to think that somehow the far simpler EV poses some sort of new, unsurmountable challenge for 3rd party repair.

Why do I need to pay Tesla $200/hour to install a part that I purchased FROM TESLA? It's not like there are any 3rd party manufacturers making aftermarket replacement parts that are questionable compatibility. The parts all just plug in and bolt into place. Plugs and bolts are not rocket science to install.

And before someone jumps in with autopilot. From a hardware point of view, Tesla's system is no more complicated to assemble/repair than the driver assistance systems in any other brand's cars. And no other auto company prevents 3rd party repair the way Tesla does.

Not sure if you’re a mechanic, or how you know a car with a 350volt battery, is no more risky than fixing a car with a 12v battery. ..

Mechanics have struggled for years, catching up with cars that have simplistic computers in them now.
Tesla is all computer, and practically needs a software engineer to fix.
How do you think this is just as easy to fix as a gas cars with simplistic computers, mechanics have been fixing for a hundred years.

The mechanics of the car are more simplistic, but the battery and computer, are no where near simplistic.
Do you really want an 18 year old mechanic working on your battery, HVAC system, computer, and software ??

Let me know how that works out.
I have constant issues with them working on gas cars, can even imagine leaving the keys to my Tesla with them.
Terrifying. ..

 

[cypho]

Not sure if you’re a mechanic, or how you know a car with a 350volt battery, is no more risky than fixing a car with a 12v battery. ..

Mechanics have struggled for years, catching up with cars that have simplistic computers in them now.
Tesla is all computer, and practically needs a software engineer to fix.
How do you think this is just as easy to fix as a gas cars with simplistic computers, mechanics have been fixing for a hundred years.

The mechanics of the car are more simplistic, but the battery and computer, are no where near simplistic.
Do you really want an 18 year old mechanic working on your battery, HVAC system, computer, and software ??

Let me know how that works out.
I have constant issues with them working on gas cars, can even imagine leaving the keys to my Tesla with them.
Terrifying. ..

Yea, 350V is more dangerous than 12v. But have you ever seen gasoline explode? That stuff is scary. Good thing no cars contain big buckets of highly flammable gasses.

 

[M109Rider]

Yea, 350V is more dangerous than 12v. But have you ever seen gasoline explode? That stuff is scary. Good thing no cars contain big buckets of highly flammable gasses.

Lol.
Ya, that’s the same thing.

 

[Knightshade]

You may want to tell road and track and car and driver, and basically everyone else who actually works in the industry

Not sure why you keep arguing this when you've been given multiple examples including by tesla of actual car makers not using 1 foot rollout.

I think even YOU would be forced to agree car makers are "in the industry"


How We Test Cars and Trucks

That's by Dan Edmunds, director of vehicle testing at Edmunds.com

some car magazines and some automobile manufacturers use rollout anyway — and fail to tell their customers. We've decided against this practice. We publish real 0-60 times instead

Bold added since you seem to keep missing the fact the word exists and what it means.

The "industry" they're using the "standard" of is the NHRA (National Hot Rod Association)- which is a North American Drag Racing Association. Which is why it's generally only US mags and makers that use it.


See also-

B5 Audi S4 Resource

Because NHRA and dragstrips are basically non-existent outside the US...ONLY US BASED MAGAZINES AND MANUFACTURERS TEST WITH ROLLOUT.

This means that British, German, or Japanese magazines will clock times that are 0.3 seconds slower than US magazines for the same car as they time true 0-60 and true quarter mile times. They use no rollout.

That partially explains why German cars often perform much better in US magazine testing than the manufacturer specifications have you believe. People often wonder why German companies publish so conservative acceleration times, especially in 0-60 mph. The lack of rollout is one major reason

So again- no- not "everyone" uses it. MOST car makers don't. Just US ones.

And even THEN Tesla only (dishonestly) uses it for P models and not non-Ps, in order to artificially inflate the difference.

Sometimes people go to great lengths to try to prove a point, and they end up searching for technicalities just out of a refusal to accept they were wrong.

Yes... sometimes people do. Like you- right now- in this rollout argument where you keep, wrongly, insisting "everyone" uses it.

 

[Dolemite]

I would imagine that a car NOT functioning as designed, (due to a software hack), that runs on software is absolutely a great candidate for a safety issue. If you think otherwise, you’re lying to yourself to justify something you want....

I’m not talking about hacking the software - I’m not interested in ****ing up my car. I’m wary of engine t00ning even in regular cars... but even then, what someone does with their own car is their choice and their risk to take. People have been building 800+ HP monsters for decades... not exactly “safe,” but I’m definitely glad they’re doing it.

I’m talking about dumb stuff like having to “code the headlight to the car.” You can swap out a headlight on this thing in literally ~45 minutes. Pull the bumper and it’s three 10 mm bolts. You unplug it and plug it back in. Easiest I’ve ever dealt with. It either works or it doesn’t. But they’ve thrown in BS in so that they can fleece us. Same with the side cameras, which the car calibrates on its own. Who knows what else?

I bought an OEM Homelink module from eBay and plugged it into my car. Tech spent 45 mins trying to activate it (after I did all the labor). Didn’t work because it was “VIN locked” to another car. Ended up having to pay the full $300...

Not sure if you’re a mechanic, or how you know a car with a 350volt battery, is no more risky than fixing a car with a 12v battery. ..

Mechanics have struggled for years, catching up with cars that have simplistic computers in them now.
Tesla is all computer, and practically needs a software engineer to fix.
How do you think this is just as easy to fix as a gas cars with simplistic computers, mechanics have been fixing for a hundred years.

The mechanics of the car are more simplistic, but the battery and computer, are no where near simplistic.
Do you really want an 18 year old mechanic working on your battery, HVAC system, computer, and software ??

Let me know how that works out.
I have constant issues with them working on gas cars, can even imagine leaving the keys to my Tesla with them.
Terrifying. ..

Not exactly. Every car on the road today is practically “all computer” - we’ve been driving computers for decades now, most people just haven’t noticed. The engine management systems in today’s modern cars are no joke - and they’re only getting more sophisticated.

But that’s not what we’re talking about - nobody’s going in to “fix” the software. In any car, that’s expected to simply work from the factory and typically, billions in R&D ensure it does. We’re talking about “hardware” that actually breaks like pumps and cameras and door handles etc. All that stuff is modular - has been for decades, so that any wrench monkey with opposable thumbs and a pulse can follow the service manual and do the repair. Nobody “fixes” anything anymore - ever. It’s way more cost effective to simply swap out the part and send you on your way.

Like I said, from what I’ve seen so far on the Model 3, it is a stupid simple car to work on. Whether or not Tesla decides to make it a pain in the ass for us remains to be seen.

 

[Sam1]

Like I said, from what I’ve seen so far on the Model 3, it is a stupid simple car to work on. Whether or not Tesla decides to make it a pain in the ass for us remains to be seen.

I think it's going to stay that way until the other manufacturers have electric cars out that compete with Tesla, and Tesla has to start considering alternative approaches to current practices, so they remain a contender in the market.

 

[M109Rider]

I think it's going to stay that way until the other manufacturers have electric cars out that compete with Tesla, and Tesla has to start considering alternative approaches to current practices, so they remain a contender in the market.

So are you two stating that the cars can’t be worked on anyone but Tesla now ?

 

[Sam1]

So are you two stating that the cars can’t be worked on anyone but Tesla now ?

Where did I insinuate that?

 

[Dolemite]

So are you two stating that the cars can’t be worked on anyone but Tesla now ?

We're expressing our concern about the likelihood of Tesla making it difficult/impossible to repair our cars without their intervention, considering what we've already seen, and the company's ability to influence the cars. This will become increasingly important as the cars age.

We should be happy that there are "enterprising" hackers out there doing this stuff and returning some degree of influence over products we've lawfully purchased with lawfully hard-earned money. Look into the ongoing battle between John Deere & farmers in the US.

 

[JPELKA]

LR awd smokes a performance.
Stay tuned to YouTube on Sunday
https://twitter.com/teslaownersSV/status/1268561259378532358

 

[Sam1]

LR awd smokes a performance.
Stay tuned to YouTube on Sunday
https://twitter.com/teslaownersSV/status/1268561259378532358

Think pretty much everyone is waiting to see the "how".

 

[JPELKA]

Products

BOOM!!!.
Id have to agree, stage 2 looks like a bad idea.
No updates and have to return back to them, then pay to get the free Tesla updates etc.
Stage 1 plug and play is a no brainer. Purchased

Also looks like both come with auto drivers door open on approach feature teased by Rich Rebuilds on Twitter Sunday.
Also toggle for on demand battery heating.