-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Snippiness 2.0
- Thread starter TexasEV
- Start date
- Status
TessP100D
Active Member
Clubs turn into cults based on the strength of hatred they face.
The stronger the hate - the stronger the club.
The stronger the club - the stronger the hate.
This is Tesla Motors Club.......
IMHO.
The stronger the hate - the stronger the club.
The stronger the club - the stronger the hate.
This is Tesla Motors Club.......
IMHO.
Last edited:
TimothyHW3
Active Member
No, it is not, stop repeating it. If it was - we would have new EPA tests(we don't) and it would be for all models(not select ones)
Can people start thinking for themselves nowadays and stop repeating stuff they half-read on the internet?
TimothyHW3
Active Member
Stop reading articles and read actual facts. "Articles" are not facts...
TimothyHW3
Active Member
*Sigh*...
This is because you don't understand how the EPA works. There are two types of Tests EPA does, full cycle and the two-cycle which results in 30% penalty for the company which chooses NOT to do the full cycle, because it doesn't take cold testing under consideration.
Tesla is the only? EV manufacturer that does the full cycle in the US, because it gives them the most range. Everyone else does the 2 cycle and takes the 30% penalty.
EPA Range testing :: evkx.net
The EPA range testing is the test used in the United States. The United States Environmental Protection Agency defines the tests.
evkx.net
Why would a company(ies) deliberately take a test that will give them 30% less range than their car can do on the EPA test and about 50% less range than their direct competitor?!
Porsche even went a bit further and increased their battery capacity on their cars via Software Update AFTER THE EPA TEST whilst NOT UPDATING their EPA estimates to reflect the new real world range. And then these "real world Porsche tests" suddenly came out, based on old EPA numbers, but with much higher battery capacity, showing how Porsche is so underestimating and Tesla overestimating on a Test that has nothing to do with EPA's actual test...
I will leave to your "imagination" and critical thinking...The answer is very obvious and lies in your question...
I *really* suggest you take a day or two to read on this, because it is a whole other rabbit hole of political, economical, manufacters and even short stock manipulation against Tesla...
You guys should really, really, and I mean really! learn to understand these things, because they are not that complicated, but will let you understand the nuances of all the "parties" involved when such things are reported - both positively for Tesla and negatively against Tesla. Or in our case taking something "negative" like lower range and turning it to something neutral or even "positive" - more "comfort features"...
As for "real world" , meaning real world under EPA conditions, tests actually confirm the EPA numbers from Tesla. Just Google "Bjorn Nyland" Model so and so and check his sunday driving tests...He consistantly gets EPA numbers and even more on his "real world" tests.
But this is not the topic. The topic is the fact that Tesla changed the EPA range only for a select number of cars and their denominator is the battery used is made in the US...And no actual EPA rating has been posted for these cars...
Now let's focus on actually testing a new Model Y delievered with the 310 miles sticker. Anyone expecting one and can test it?
Last edited:
You used a false precept to push your “concern of this ideal” narrative and you still want to because it fits your worldview. Disgusting and wrong. You must work in media.
You are incapable of putting past how this “news” was brought about and simply discussing the ideal. That’s fine. Ignore this conversation.
You’re incapable of recognizing the reality that your false narrative is fueled by a false precept. And you’re asking people to engage in it further. Disgusting.
TessP100D
Active Member
TimothyHW3
Active Member
The EPA, once again, has a separate highway cycle. It is not 70mph, but close. It is listed separately in their PDF where they list the kWh pulled and consumption for each run. It is obviously not as comprehensive as a 70mph run from 100% to 0%.
But even that would be misleading as you have topography, weather and roll resistance of the road to factor in(which actually play a huge role in EVs and not so much in ICE because they are not that efficient to begin with)
The test from Inside EVs are conducted on different days, weather, wind and even roads.
Not remotely comparable between runs and yet you take them over EPA, because you don't understand how testing works and what affects range...
If you are interested in their highway cycle then you can pull up the PDF and read it and just read the highway cycle.
The "EPA results" you compare are the combination of the five cycles or in case of none Teslas, the two cycles minus 30% penalty. They include the highway test in their avg.
They are "unpredictable" only because EV manufacturers abuse it by using the 2 cycle and get 30% penalty to confuse you(read the previous page and my comments!)
There is not a single test in the world, that would please everyone, but the EPA test is actually a pretty good test and very close to the real world.
The WLTP used in Europe is a joke on the other hand as it doesn't even include HVAC. And the chinese one is bonkers.
So while the EPA is not flawless, it is almost as good as you can get from an automated test that should cover different scenarios.
If anything they should remove the two step cycle and not give Porsche, Hyundai etc. the option to game the test, by getting the 30% penalty for cold weather and then doing a 70mph run in perfect weather and saying "Ahaaa, you see EPA Tests are bull and Tesla lies"(for the people like yourself who doesn't read EPA or understand EPA)
@jkdman123 you can click disagree all you want or you can actually learn something, your choice. Either way zero f... given
What are you, 5 yrs old, going to my other posts on other threads and voting them down?? You realize why you're getting down voted, right? It's because you can't seem to have a conversation without acting like a giant anus. You *seem* to be knowledgeable on the subject but you shoot yourself in the foot by presenting that knowledge like a complete and utter jackass.@jkdman123 you can click disagree all you want or you can actually learn something, your choice. Either way zero f... given
You need to take a step back and ask yourself what it is exactly you're trying to accomplish. If you're only posting to make yourself look like a sharp-witted genius in your own eyes, rock on, my dude. If you think you're using information in a productive way to help others understand a particular issue, then you're seriously deluded.
Krugerrand
Meow
FYI, most of the disagrees you get are because you behave like a pedantic jerk toward people.I can't speak for the other user, but 5 years ago I was right here pointing out Sebas predicted dates were unrealistic (as were some of his earlier references to the speed of horse->car transition in that big youtube link everyone kept pointing out to say ALL EVS BY 2025) and getting hammered with disagrees for a take that turned out 100% accurate.
'Every New Vehicle Will Be Electric' by 2025, Disruption Expert Says
A Silicon Valley entrepreneur and author has explained how electric vehicles will disrupt and change transportation across the world. But first, Tony Seba — who is an instructor in disruption and clean energy at Stanford University’s Continuing Studies Program, explained to an audience at the...www.renewableenergyworld.com
He then cites Dysons 2.5B investment in EVs as an example of disrupting the industry. Remind me how that investment turned out?
IIRC he later moved his goalposts to 2030 (also entirely unrealistic- esp. given he's talking ALL vehicles not just cars, in ALL countries).... not sure where said goalposts are these days- perhaps he's finally stopped giving hard dates that aren't happening, I dunno.
Now if you want to follow Seba as "Guy who sees disruptive trends early in the trend"- Sure-- he's your guy... But it's kinda late in the EV thing for that to be relevant? That same 5 years ago it was obvious to (nearly) EVERYONE here that EVENTUALLY all vehicles would be EVs. It was obvious to a much smaller # it wouldn't be 2025. Or 2030.
If you want to follow Seba as "Guy who accurately predicts the timeline of those trends- especially for investment purposes (which some were doing here those 5 years ago)"which is the main way he'd have any relevance in this thread at this point- then you might want to reconsider him being your guy.
m5james
Member
As a Tesla employee and/or simp, please explain why any of us should have to pay to update the MCU when we bought our vehicles saying they had ALL the equipment needed to have FSD...them not being about to get it to work on MCU1 should be there problem, NOT the early adopters. I'm not trying to run Windows 10 on a Windows CE machine, but we were told FSD would work and I never saw the * saying MCU1 would just be forgotten about. Make it make sense.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Article
