Stalk or no stalk argument [not] settled

First, we should analyze the matter without considering that the brand Tesla is making these changes and understand from a automotive/ engineering/ ergonomic point of view that whether indicator in steering has benefits compare to stalk. If it does, I'll accept that.

Obviously there is always a trade off in anything.

Having stalk as an independent module that it's functionality is not influenced by the functionality of another module (steering). Ergonomically, we apply force by our arms to move the steering, and we operate the stalk by our fingers (not thumb). This configuration only make sense if the steering is round. So stalks works with a round steering.

The no stalk configuration is ergonomically acceptable if there is a yoke. And only if the yoke doesn't need to turn not more halfway. In this case your thumbs are always where they suppose to be to function.

Another issue is the gear Selector.

First, I don't know what how you would select gear if you break your screen. Second, if you have a yoke configuration, the intent is to keep you hands on the yoke all the time. But that conflicts with selecting gear because to select gear you have to take you hand off the yoke and touch the screen.

Another issue is that selecting gear on screen mandates eye engagement (but not the stalk) which again defeats the purpose of buttons in yoke.

So the no stalk configuration only makes sense if the gear Selector is also on the yoke and the yoke only turns halfway.

 

[zoomer0056]

shut down Tesla altogether, cost of production goes to $0

Bleeding cost goes up astronomically with absolutely zero income.

 

[ChooseFreedom]

Bleeding cost goes up astronomically with absolutely zero income.

Exactly.
The smaller the margins, the higher the emphasis on cost cutting.
Honda and Toyota demand a certain percentage cost cut from all their suppliers every year. It's a constant battle for their Tier 1/2 suppliers to stay in profit.

Tesla's margins allow them some flexibility, which they actually needed in the early years. They were by far the biggest company doing EV at any real volume. So they had a limited selection of suppliers for certain EV components which gives the price advantage to those suppliers.
Now, with more demand from other automakers, more suppliers of EV-specific components/materials have surfaced, so competition can keep prices competitive.
But any and every business is constantly doing cost analysis and looking for better efficiencies as well as material/parts cost reductions, regardless of their margins. But smaller margins means higher pressure on cost cutting.

I really don't understand some people's distain for Tesla over their margins. They're a for-profit business. Every automaker would kill for Tesla's margins. The hate is probably for other reasons, those folks just look for any excuse to badmouth and be negative.
It's not like all that profit goes straight into Elon's pocket. Tesla does have some lofty goals and projects coming in the future that take quite a bit of funds.

 

[smogne41]

Correct me if I am wrong, but has Tesla/Elon every actually said that the stalk removal has anything to do with cost reduction? As far as I recall, this is just community head canon. The explanation is probably far dumber/simpler: Elon likes no stalks. I don't really buy the cost-reduction theory, there are lots of other places to cut more cost than something so driver-facing and useful. It makes absolutely no sense to add a rear screen to Highland for example if cost cutting is that brutal a consideration. That screen is going to be horribly underutilized when averaged over the fleet.

 

[zoomer0056]

Correct me if I am wrong, but has Tesla/Elon every actually said that the stalk removal has anything to do with cost reduction?

I think your right ... its pure speculation.

 

[ChooseFreedom]

Correct me if I am wrong, but has Tesla/Elon every actually said that the stalk removal has anything to do with cost reduction? As far as I recall, this is just community head canon. The explanation is probably far dumber/simpler: Elon likes no stalks. I don't really buy the cost-reduction theory, there are lots of other places to cut more cost than something so driver-facing and useful. It makes absolutely no sense to add a rear screen to Highland for example if cost cutting is that brutal a consideration. That screen is going to be horribly underutilized when averaged over the fleet.

Agree. All speculation.
Also the theory that it makes way for eventual ability to "sink" the wheel into the dash during FSD.

 

[3sr+buyer]

Maybe they know that many Tesla drivers do not use turn signals?

 

[whitex]

Bleeding cost goes up astronomically with absolutely zero income.

Company which shuts down and does not exist anymore has $0 costs. If you don't believe me, see if Enron has any cost for 2023. They used to have a $70B market cap at one point, then they reduces their costs to $0, market cap went with it.

 

[Adam3]

Correct me if I am wrong, but has Tesla/Elon every actually said that the stalk removal has anything to do with cost reduction? As far as I recall, this is just community head canon. The explanation is probably far dumber/simpler: Elon likes no stalks. I don't really buy the cost-reduction theory, there are lots of other places to cut more cost than something so driver-facing and useful. It makes absolutely no sense to add a rear screen to Highland for example if cost cutting is that brutal a consideration. That screen is going to be horribly underutilized when averaged over the fleet.

Agreed. Stalkess is mainly to reduce the number of "interactions" or effort a driver needs to perform with their vehicle.

 

[kpanda17]

Agreed. Stalkess is mainly to reduce the number of "interactions" or effort a driver needs to perform with their vehicle.

It’s a step toward driverless Robotaxi design

 

[WyoDude]

My Tesla Model 3 Highland experience – 1000 kilometres and 2 weeks later (in Ireland)

So I have now driven 1000 kilometres in my two weeks of ownership so far of my Model 3 Highland. Not only is this my first Tesla, it’s also my first EV having owned a range of different high powered cars in the past, mainly BMW’s and rwd Japanese coupes. While this thread brings it down to...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[kpanda17]

great video on the new designs in vehicles, stalkless is just one of many steps active and coming
Its a good read and watch

Autoline After Hours

LIVE Thursdays at 3 PM ET! TOPICS: – How the price war started – It’s imperative to cut cost – […]

www.autoline.tv

 

[ChooseFreedom]

Correct me if I am wrong, but has Tesla/Elon every actually said that the stalk removal has anything to do with cost reduction? As far as I recall, this is just community head canon. The explanation is probably far dumber/simpler: Elon likes no stalks. I don't really buy the cost-reduction theory, there are lots of other places to cut more cost than something so driver-facing and useful. It makes absolutely no sense to add a rear screen to Highland for example if cost cutting is that brutal a consideration. That screen is going to be horribly underutilized when averaged over the fleet.

Big picture: It's not as simple as just cost reduction.

I read somewhere that nearly 50% of the parts in the Highland are new/different from the old M3. So Tesla is improving the car overall. They are looking at parts reduction/count, not just cost reduction. They add a screen to the back, they take away stalks. It's obviously not a 1:1 count, but in making the Highland 3 a more "Model S" experience, they're upgrading the overall M3, and barely raising the price I might add (for now). Removing the stalks is a step toward the minimal feel that Tesla has always designed toward. Elon wants Tesla to be like Apple, more computer than car. So the more controls that can be put in the software, the less physical stalks/buttons there are, hence minimal. (yes, I realize signals are now buttons. big picture)

Will removing the stalks from all models save on costs, sure a bit. But the decision was never simply to reduce part cost.
It also likely eliminates a supplier or two, so one less potential supply chain issue, one less contract to negotiate, one less production schedule to plan, one less warehouse shelf to inventory, and on and on. All of which cut costs via time savings.
(And hey, a little less plastic in the world)

Tesla is going to be releasing their new model designed for the lowest budget EV buyers in the next year or so. That means they don't need the M3 to be the "bargain Tesla" anymore. So they're upgrading it in order to better compete with it's newer competitors.
I suspect once the new model is released, we'll probably see a price bump on the M3. Just makes business sense to keep a gap between the new one and the M3. But they've already upgraded it to justify that bump. This is probably the best year to buy a Highland, IMO. Major bump in quality/value for very minor price difference. (consider inflation and you're actually saving $) I'm not currently in the financial situation to do it, or I'd be seriously considering it. (maybe if BTC hits $100k soon )

 

[afadeev]

Agreed. Stalkess is mainly to reduce the number of "interactions" or effort a driver needs to perform with their vehicle.

That makes ZERO sense.
Initiating turn signals is still and "interaction" that is required by law in most jurisdictions. It can be intuitive and easy (stalks), or it can be unintuitive and suboptimal (touch buttons).
An "interaction" will still take place.

It’s a step toward driverless Robotaxi design

You mis-spelled that.
It should be Robo-Fraud-cy.

 

[Skavatar]

neuralink to the car

 

[mborkow]

Agreed. Stalkess is mainly to reduce the number of "interactions" or effort a driver needs to perform with their vehicle.

WRT turn signals, drivers still need the same number of interactions even w/o stalks (they now need to push a button on the steering wheel instead but it’s the same number of interactions). Getting rid of the stalks is about getting rid of an expensive part, “the best part is no part.” It’s not about reducing driver interactions.

 

[Knightshade]

Possibly relevant to this thread

Tesla's controversial turn signals are going to ding its near-perfect safety rating

Tesla’s controversial turn signals without the traditional steering wheel stalk are going to make the automaker lose its near-perfect safety...

electrek.co

 

[stopcrazypp]

Possibly relevant to this thread

Tesla's controversial turn signals are going to ding its near-perfect safety rating

Tesla’s controversial turn signals without the traditional steering wheel stalk are going to make the automaker lose its near-perfect safety...

electrek.co

The EU directive doesn't really address the turn signal stalk situation. The turn signals are still physical controls (not touch screen). You can argue about gear selection, but the list doesn't cover gear selection, plus the car still has physical gear selectors as a backup.

 

[drtimhill]

The EU directive doesn't really address the turn signal stalk situation. The turn signals are still physical controls (not touch screen). You can argue about gear selection, but the list doesn't cover gear selection, plus the car still has physical gear selectors as a backup.

Plus the logic is bogus. The argument is that it's dangerous to 'take your eyes off the road". Ok, so that would argue for a completely hands-free form of inout, such as voice commands, NOT for physical buttons. Sure, argue against touch screens, but arguing that implies physical buttons is a false dichotomy.

 

[EfficientWatts]

The EU directive doesn't really address the turn signal stalk situation. The turn signals are still physical controls (not touch screen). You can argue about gear selection, but the list doesn't cover gear selection, plus the car still has physical gear selectors as a backup.

The devil are in the details. The quote that I keep seeing tossed around is this:

"New Euro NCAP tests due in 2026 will encourage manufacturers to use separate, physical controls for basic functions in an intuitive manner, limiting eyes-off-road time and therefore promoting safer driving," he said.

The key word to me here is intuitive manner. I am not sure if the buttons for turn signals would fall under such a manner despite being physical buttons. There probably will be additional clarification about certain other operations (like the shifter).

We will have to see, but I do not think this is a slam dunk (in either direction if I'm honest). We will have to see what the actual requirements are.

 

[drtimhill]

The devil are in the details. The quote that I keep seeing tossed around is this:



The key word to me here is intuitive manner. I am not sure if the buttons for turn signals would fall under such a manner despite being physical buttons. There probably will be additional clarification about certain other operations (like the shifter).

We will have to see, but I do not think this is a slam dunk (in either direction if I'm honest). We will have to see what the actual requirements are.

The basic problem, of course, it that everything was new at some point. There was nothing "intuitive" about a stalk when it was first introduced, and in fact I've driven cars over the years where the turn signal stack was on the right instead of the left.