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

New Highland UK - stalks

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Removing stalks saves a very significant amount and reduces a lot of complexity for a solution that is as good or better.
Can you point us to any evidence of a “very significant amount’ please, especially in the context of adding ventilated seats and rear screens. And evidence it is a better solution would also be useful. The only context I’ve seen an argument for better involves variable speed steering where your hands never need to move on the steering wheel like the cybertruck, not the M3. They’re otherwise bold claims.

On the video you posted we see alternate hands being needed to indicate, that doesn’t seem easy to me especially when the indicators are located at nearer 12 or 6 o’clock when they’re needed, or when the wheel might be moving.

I understand you’re happy to say you get on with them, that’s great for you, but the argument those who don’t are people who are simply unwilling to accept change when the audience is people who have accepted change by going pure EV as early adopters just feels a little disingenuous. And if the argument is they’re incapable of making the switch, then by definition they’re a dangerous thing to roll out because for that proportion of people they’re not viable, and we have to share the roads with those people.

I’ve now had chance to try them for an hour in the uk, and from that I’d say 98% of the time you get the hang of them, the remaining 2% or so they’re far from easy, and potentially dangerous, and the test drive has reaffirmed my fears, it hasn’t softened them. And as for a personal fear of change, i got my first Tesla in 2015 and have travelled across Europe in it, so I wouldn’t describe myself as someone reluctant to accept change.
 
Can you point us to any evidence of a “very significant amount’ please, especially in the context of adding ventilated seats and rear screens. And evidence it is a better solution would also be useful. The only context I’ve seen an argument for better involves variable speed steering where your hands never need to move on the steering wheel like the cybertruck, not the M3. They’re otherwise bold claims.

On the video you posted we see alternate hands being needed to indicate, that doesn’t seem easy to me especially when the indicators are located at nearer 12 or 6 o’clock when they’re needed, or when the wheel might be moving.

I understand you’re happy to say you get on with them, that’s great for you, but the argument those who don’t are people who are simply unwilling to accept change when the audience is people who have accepted change by going pure EV as early adopters just feels a little disingenuous. And if the argument is they’re incapable of making the switch, then by definition they’re a dangerous thing to roll out because for that proportion of people they’re not viable, and we have to share the roads with those people.

I’ve now had chance to try them for an hour in the uk, and from that I’d say 98% of the time you get the hang of them, the remaining 2% or so they’re far from easy, and potentially dangerous, and the test drive has reaffirmed my fears, it hasn’t softened them. And as for a personal fear of change, i got my first Tesla in 2015 and have travelled across Europe in it, so I wouldn’t describe myself as someone reluctant to accept change.
Of course it is pure speculation on the exact amount of cost savings, however manufacturers go to significant lengths to save cents, it's clear that stalks would cost more than a few cents and the complexity in installing them is fairly considerable in the overall scheme of things. Yes they've added other features, the rear screen definitely one that is unlikely to get much use in the Model 3. I can only assume they feel adding those features are a bigger selling point than having stalks. Commonality accross models also helps with costs and logistics.

My argument isn't really about people being incapable, I think any willing and able bodied person can easily use them, I just don't think there is any argument to label them dangerous just because people don't like them. I get some may not be able to use them just as some people struggle for various reasons with all manner of controls on all vehicles. There are after market options for all of those situations and you don't label pedals dangerous because some people can't use them, etc.

At the end of the day it's all personal preference. Some will always hate any feature on a car, that may sway them not to buy it, while it may be a selling feature for others, some will adapt, some will use after market products etc.
 
I work in Product/UX and it appears to me that Tesla's designers seem intent on breaking a UX principle called Fitt's law at every available opportunity:

"Fitts's law is used to model the act of pointing, either by physically touching an object with a hand or finger, or virtually, by pointing to an object on a computer monitor using a pointing device."

Fitts's law is most commonly applied to software interfaces, but it was actually created to measure physical interfaces and the ease at which they can be designed for better interaction. By removing the stalks (a stationary object) and adding the actions to the steering wheel (a moving object), they've increased the difficulty and the cognitive load for acquiring the target (the buttons on the steering wheel).

The same can be said for moving the drive selection to the touchscreen, the distance to acquire the target on the touchscreen is far greater than having a stalk (just a finger flick away). Sure, people can get used to these changes - our brains are quite complex things. However, no one can argue that Tesla hasn't diminished the user experience by removing the stalks.
 
Can you point us to any evidence of a “very significant amount’ please, especially in the context of adding ventilated seats and rear screens.
We had this discussion before when they removed USS. Any saving X volume of cars is significant if you're a dyed in the wool capitalist. There's a Sandy Monroe interview with Musk where he bemoans the number of parts in a steering wheel, so I'm sure the devs/designers will be focussing on that to get in his good books.
I remember a documentary a looong time ago about British Airways. They were pondering removing the pre-flight chocolate they used to serve. A little tiny chocolate. By getting rid of it they saved £1m a year. So these things add up and someone has to balance that with the user experience. As we have seen, people still buy the cars.
 
We had this discussion before when they removed USS. Any saving X volume of cars is significant if you're a dyed in the wool capitalist. There's a Sandy Monroe interview with Musk where he bemoans the number of parts in a steering wheel, so I'm sure the devs/designers will be focussing on that to get in his good books.
I remember a documentary a looong time ago about British Airways. They were pondering removing the pre-flight chocolate they used to serve. A little tiny chocolate. By getting rid of it they saved £1m a year. So these things add up and someone has to balance that with the user experience. As we have seen, people still buy the cars.
Fair enough but I hate to think how much it costs to add a rear screen by the same logic, it's only a large sum if you take the volume into consideration, at a unit price is pretty small relatie to the the build cost, and if they ended up having to reduce the car price by £500 or increase referral rewards or take out advertising, or any other measure to help sales as a result it counters the saving. I guess for me spending money on primary controls is money well spent.

As an aside, BA has today been announced (again) as one of the worst for customer service, maybe the penny pinching culture ends up to the detrement of the brand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ACarneiro
Another issue with the stalks we don't seem to have discussed is if you drive a number of different cars and regularly switch between them. Now I know people adapt quickly to the lesser used controls eg. heater, radio etc but these controls are not needed instantly and are allways in the same place.

For example, there is small roundabout near us where if you turn right without signaling you will be flattened by large trucks assuming you are going straight across. Conversley, if you don't signal left halfway round a car will pull straight out in front of you from the other junction. Using stalks it's a piece of cake, with buttons it will be a pain in the arse.

I know the highway code says you don't need to signal right, but it would probably be fatal not to do it at this roundabout (and many others).
 
As an aside, BA has today been announced (again) as one of the worst for customer service, maybe the penny pinching culture ends up to the detrement of the brand.
UX vs Profit:)

British Airways made £50 per second profit during first nine months of 2023​

BA parent company IAG warns of possible problems with air-traffic control and airports’ resilience, despite £1.15bn profit

 
My argument isn't really about people being incapable, I think any willing and able bodied person can easily use them, I just don't think there is any argument to label them dangerous just because people don't like them. I get some may not be able to use them just as some people struggle for various reasons with all manner of controls on all vehicles. There are after market options for all of those situations and you don't label pedals dangerous because some people can't use them, etc.

I consider myself quite willing and able bodied, having driven many different makes and models of cars, trucks, tractors, and motorcycles over the years, and never had to consciously think about the controls as much as I need to think about using the buttons on my Tesla. The simple fact is they are poorly designed.

There have been countless posts over the years, both here and on X-Twitter, of current users of the buttons that have not gotten used to them, despite using them for years and/or thousand of miles. To imply there is something wrong with all the people who do struggle with them is a weak argument, and if anything, just strengthens my argument. Also, saying those users should by after market solutions for something as important and indicators is ludicrous.
 
Also, saying those users should by after market solutions for something as important and indicators is ludicrous.

To be fair you either do something about it or keep complaining. One solves the issue and the other won't bring them back to existing cars. One could say you should of rejected the car and be done with but if there is nothing out there that fulfils your needs then you must compromise.

I still remember the days that some of us used to buy a car and change the infotainment system, suspension, exhaust, wheels, steering wheel etc.

There have been many more complaints over the many more years for the lack of buttons and the simplistic interior. Maybe if those many people didn't show so much love for buttons, this would not have happened. The irony..
 
  • Like
Reactions: init6 and Jules22
There are plenty of threads about people buying replacement Model Y suspension, altering the hifi especially the sub, and getting sexy buttons to deal with the lack of physical controls. I’ve never modified a car suspension before but I’m considering it on my MY, not for a custom look or to make it a track weapon which tended to be the historic reasons, but to address the bone hard ride. I’ve also had the interior trim changed, again something ive never had to do before, because the white looked like it still had the protective wrapper on it

You can only buy what manufacturers sell, you’d just hope that a responsible manufacturer would seek customer feedback and refine their products to continually reduce the gripes. If we refused to buy a product when there were any shortcomings I imagine we’d never buy anything.
 
To be fair you either do something about it or keep complaining. One solves the issue and the other won't bring them back to existing cars.
With the horrendous insurance premiums for a stock Tesla, I’d hate to think what they’d charge when you let them know you’ve fitted a 3rd party indicator stalk.

Good luck is all I can say 😂
 
With the horrendous insurance premiums for a stock Tesla, I’d hate to think what they’d charge when you let them know you’ve fitted a 3rd party indicator stalk.

Good luck is all I can say 😂

Last two calls to them was to inform them that I put an air freshener in the car and some furry dice.... spent about an hour on the phone before they answered and basically told me not to waste their time again... so I dont think I would bother again :rolleyes:

Ive also called the police before because I caught myself speeding... They asked me if I had any evidence... 🤷‍♂️
 
Last two calls to them was to inform them that I put an air freshener in the car and some furry dice.... spent about an hour on the phone before they answered and basically told me not to waste their time again... so I dont think I would bother again :rolleyes:

Ive also called the police before because I caught myself speeding... They asked me if I had any evidence... 🤷‍♂️
They're laughing at you, not with you...
 
Adding an aftermarket indicator stalk and insurance is a valid concern, even if it is illogical for an insurer to have an issue with it. In my limited experience insurers look to penalise any non-factory supplied alteration. PPF is a good example. Very few insurers will allow it. I understand it can increase the cost of a repair, so exclude coverage for the PPF but don't refuse to insure or impose a substantial uplift in premium. I don't see how PPF can make a car less safe or more accident prone. So I can only imagine the conversation with an insurer if someone declares they added an aftermarket indictor stalk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mark II and Js1977
They're laughing at you, not with you...

giphy.gif
 
Adding an aftermarket indicator stalk and insurance is a valid concern, even if it is illogical for an insurer to have an issue with it. In my limited experience insurers look to penalise any non-factory supplied alteration. PPF is a good example. Very few insurers will allow it. I understand it can increase the cost of a repair, so exclude coverage for the PPF but don't refuse to insure or impose a substantial uplift in premium. I don't see how PPF can make a car less safe or more accident prone. So I can only imagine the conversation with an insurer if someone declares they added an aftermarket indictor stalk.

It's like common sense.... depends on who you ask...
 
  • Like
Reactions: KennethS
Adding an aftermarket indicator stalk and insurance is a valid concern, even if it is illogical for an insurer to have an issue with it. In my limited experience insurers look to penalise any non-factory supplied alteration. PPF is a good example. Very few insurers will allow it. I understand it can increase the cost of a repair, so exclude coverage for the PPF but don't refuse to insure or impose a substantial uplift in premium. I don't see how PPF can make a car less safe or more accident prone. So I can only imagine the conversation with an insurer if someone declares they added an aftermarket indictor stalk.
PPF increases the premium because the risk profile of people who wrap is higher than those who don’t. Of course, this is mainly influenced by people who use a wrap to do crazy colour schemes rather than protecting their paint, but it seems the insurers can’t be bothered to differentiate the two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Adopado
My daughter and I drove a Highland today straight after she tried a Model Y LR.
Brief conclusion, softer ride in the M3 but regarding the indicator buttons, not difficult to get into a situation on a roundabout where the buttons are now on the opposite side of the steering wheel and upside down. Exactly as predicted and unintuitive.
No doubt people will eventually get used to it but far less when the driver swaps between multiple cars.
It isn't a reason I wouldn't buy but nor does it improve anything in my opinion.