I think you will get more than $3,000 worth of features regardless of when FSD development ends on your car.
That's the real expected value of the call option.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I think you will get more than $3,000 worth of features regardless of when FSD development ends on your car.
That's the real expected value of the call option.
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Anyone else get their $200 class action settlement check this week?
Let's see... Pay $120K in late 2016/early 2017 for another Model S due to the promises made at the time. Two years later, get $200 in the mail, and still zero ability to accomplish ANY of the features promised in the December 2016 video.
My bar for satisfaction is lower than most. When the car successfully negotiates a single stop sign while "Navigating by Autopilot", I'll call it a win. Never mind that AP2 cars still cannot react to speed limit signs as can AP1 cars. Never mind that reaction to a simple (versus any permutations beyond the simple) traffic light is still far off. Never mind that MobilEye could do all of this 2+ years ago.
Feh.
Let's see... Pay $120K in late 2016/early 2017 for another Model S due to the promises made at the time. Two years later, get $200 in the mail, and still zero ability to accomplish ANY of the features promised in the December 2016 video.
My bar for satisfaction is lower than most. When the car successfully negotiates a single stop sign while "Navigating by Autopilot", I'll call it a win. Never mind that AP2 cars still cannot react to speed limit signs as can AP1 cars. Never mind that reaction to a simple (versus any permutations beyond the simple) traffic light is still far off. Never mind that MobilEye could do all of this 2+ years ago.
Feh.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
When did Tesla ever promise EAP/Nav on AP would do stop lights or stop signs?
EAP feature description from tesla.com:
Tesla said:
EAP as it exists today is entirely feature complete for what they promise above, other than lane changes still requiring confirmation, which they keep promising to update soon.
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
LOL. No. Not even close. And that description was heavily revised after the timeframe I specified. But never mind that.
The video from December 2016 was very specific, as was Musk's follow up that AP1 and AP2 would have parity by year end, and then that we'd have something in 3-6 months.
Further, until very recently, there was no E in EAP. And if you think Navigate by Autopilot is stellar, I've got a bridge for ya.
In any case, what was clearly shown in the video was a Model S stopping at a stop sign and then turning to continue on a proscribed route.
Now we have the promise of FSD retrofits this year. Think that through from an actual delivery standpoint. For reference, we were told that MCU2 would be retrofittable for MCU1 cars. Turned out to be a lie.
So. Claim all you want about EAP but what is currently in that featureset is NOT what was in that featureset during the timeframe I referenced, and without going further down the silly rabbithole of EAP versus FSD, we are in NO WAY near what the December 2016 video portended as being essentially right around the corner. 2+ years later.
Not close.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Do you have a link to this Dec 2016 video you keep referencing so I can see what actual promises it contains about EAP specifically?
Nothing to really think through on the FSD HW swap though- the AP2 computer was explicitly designed for a quick easy swap- the MCU never was. Apples and Turnips there I'm afraid.
EDIT- You don't mean the OCTOBER 2016 video here, right?
Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Teslas
Because that one does not mention AP at all. "full self driving" is right in the title of the link. EAP and FSD aren't the same thing (though one is a prerequisite to buy the other)
Nothing to really think through on the FSD HW swap though- the AP2 computer was explicitly designed for a quick easy swap- the MCU never was. Apples and Turnips there I'm afraid.
EDIT- You don't mean the OCTOBER 2016 video here, right?
Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Teslas
Because that one does not mention AP at all. "full self driving" is right in the title of the link. EAP and FSD aren't the same thing (though one is a prerequisite to buy the other)
Last edited:
MCU2 is nice but not essential. The company has chosen to bet the farm on the Model 3. For healthy support of your vehicle going forward, you need to let Tesla prioritize accordingly.
Tesla was also counting to be able to use Mobileye data to train its AP2 system. Since they could not, they have to build it from scratch. No one wanted that except for Mobileye. It is what it is.
Lastly, you seem very bitter about your Tesla ownership experience. I don't think you should buy another one. Save you from future grief.
TaoJones
Beyond Driven
Your multiple apologies for Tesla and trailing opinion are noted.
As a multiple Tesla owner and shareholder (long, tyvm), I have no problem a) not apologizing for Tesla, b) calling out their bait and switch when it happens (another example was the early 2017 denial of 100Ds unless one gave up included supercharging, only to see that restored/rescinded less than 6 weeks later) and c) calling a spade a spade while d) noting their competitive advantages also in spades - see SC network and safety margins relative to almost every other vehicle on the planet.
These things are not mutually exclusive. And many owners both within TMC and Tesla.com fora have nooooo trouble expressing both types of sentiments simultaneously.
But thanks for the future purchase advice. I'll be sure to give it all of the consideration it deserves.
Without miles driven and number on the road info deaths in a certain type of vehicle are pretty much useless information.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I guess you didn't actually look at the study you're discussing?
Because the death rates are all normalized across models for # on the road (and for how long- the rates are per million registered vehicle years by model)
Cool, I'm a multiple Tesla owner and long shareholder as well.
a.) Have no problem calling out Tesla when -WARRANTED-
b.) Understanding their situation.Yes it sucks to have to choose between a 90D battery with FUSC or 100D without FUSC - only to have FUSC be granted later anyway on the 100D.
Tesla didn't WANT to give free FUSC to 100D or to anyone. They were forced to pull those demand levers.
Though your FUSC should be at least transferable if you ordered at end of 2016. No 100D on secondary market has FUSC.
My most disliked post in TMC history was when I suggested Elon handled the 3P+ debacle poorly to investment forum. So yes, I can too see both sides and see the big picture.
Those by the way who complained about MCU2 swaps not happening have selective memory.
1.) MCU1 software rewritten to be optimized, removing the requirement for MCU2.
2.) Elon mentioned a possible swap but not to the same confidence as he did HW3. MCU2 was never discussed on a conference call. HW3 was discussed on the past two conference calls.
3.) Do you REALLY think Tesla has time to play grab ass games with MCU2 refits when ramping out Model 3. And for what exactly? So can surf on the crippled browser versus the other 100 devices you can consume info on?
So yes, you will continue to buy Tesla's and give them credit where you think its due and criticism where you think it's due. That's great, I would ask you consider more objectivity.
I will sell all my shares and short if this is the case. No way you can survive screwing up 150,000 customers.
Last edited:
Dan Detweiler
Active Member
All of these concerns could be solved simply by Tesla adopting the same principals as other manufacturers. Don't make any changes from year to year. Only with the new model years would there be any updates/changes to the cars. What you buy is what you get.
I, for one, would never give up the spontaneity and progressiveness of immediate updates and an ever improving cars. I think that is one of the huge selling points of a Tesla...at least it was for me. Am I upset when a feature/tech/cost gets changed that adversely effects me? Sure, but the alternative is simply unacceptable to me.
Dan
Just wanted to respond to the person saying EAP is “feature complete.”
I have to imagine you have never actually USED EAP with nav on AP to even be able to suggest that. Nav on AP has so many problems right now it’s not even useful. I don’t even activate it anymore at all because of all of the irritations due to incorrect decision making, phantom braking, unnecessary swerving, and lane changing technology is effectively just a novelty/gimmick, not actually useful as a driving aid, especially in heavy traffic.
Anyone who’s actually used EAP with nav on AP knows what I’m talking about in each of these points, because the problems manifest so frequently that every single user who’s driven more than 10 miles with it has seen them happen.
I work in the high tech industry. When delivering software to end users, “Feature complete” does not simply mean the features exist. It means they exist, are functional, and behave as they are intended and as the customer expects. These features are not behaving as they are intended or as customers expect. For example, in heavy traffic, I would expect my auto lane changing car to actually change lanes when the car next to me is giving me just barely enough space to squeeze in. I do not expect my car to leave its blinker on indefinitely until someone decides to leave 3 car lengths of distance with which to let me in (which will never happen).
I have to imagine you have never actually USED EAP with nav on AP to even be able to suggest that. Nav on AP has so many problems right now it’s not even useful. I don’t even activate it anymore at all because of all of the irritations due to incorrect decision making, phantom braking, unnecessary swerving, and lane changing technology is effectively just a novelty/gimmick, not actually useful as a driving aid, especially in heavy traffic.
Anyone who’s actually used EAP with nav on AP knows what I’m talking about in each of these points, because the problems manifest so frequently that every single user who’s driven more than 10 miles with it has seen them happen.
I work in the high tech industry. When delivering software to end users, “Feature complete” does not simply mean the features exist. It means they exist, are functional, and behave as they are intended and as the customer expects. These features are not behaving as they are intended or as customers expect. For example, in heavy traffic, I would expect my auto lane changing car to actually change lanes when the car next to me is giving me just barely enough space to squeeze in. I do not expect my car to leave its blinker on indefinitely until someone decides to leave 3 car lengths of distance with which to let me in (which will never happen).
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I use it daily- so your imagination appears to be failing you.
Again I use it daily- 30+ miles each way.... I've never had phantom braking in thousands of miles of use, nor any swerving.... the only problem with lane changes (besides them being a bit overly cautious) are they still require confirmation- remove that and EAP is feature complete
You can tell by reading the actual list of features for EAP.
I didn't say "EAP is feature complete and works 100% perfect 100% of the time"
I said it's feature complete (minus removing lane change confirmation) because that's a a fact
Once that is fixed EAP will offer the complete list of features that it was promised to offer in the Tesla description of EAP.
Obviously they'll continue to improve how well each of those features works, but you'll already have all the ones you were promised.
That's grossly and outright false.
It appears to be highly dependent on the roads involved. As I say I've experienced 0 phantom braking ever for example, over thousands of miles of EAP including Nav on AP.
But that wouldn't actually change the fact that it's feature complete. Feature complete doesn't mean "every feature is perfect" it means "every feature exists"
Yes, it does actually.
That's literally what those words mean.
Of course the vendor might then offer iterative improvements of those features over time.
They largely have, for me, over thousands of miles.
Not flawlessly- there's been a few merges and a few on/off ramps it's needed help with and such.
But nowhere near as poorly as your own experience has been.
Your inability to imagine anyone isn't having exactly the same experience as you seems to be the root of the issue here.
I use Navigate on Autopilot regularly, too. It's pretty weak (dangerous) using on off/ramps, especially in traffic though.
I have had phantom braking, but I don't know if that was from Navigate on AutoPilot, Auto Pilot or Crash Prevention.
It also wants to do phantom lane changes. No big deal.
Many owners of Jeep Grand Cherokee (which I also own) complain about phantom braking.
I never had it happen, but I had plenty of phantom warnings.
But they were more of an overreaction to cars exiting or not exactly in their lane.
Where the Model 3 appears to do it for no reason at all out of the blue.
I have had phantom braking, but I don't know if that was from Navigate on AutoPilot, Auto Pilot or Crash Prevention.
It also wants to do phantom lane changes. No big deal.
Many owners of Jeep Grand Cherokee (which I also own) complain about phantom braking.
I never had it happen, but I had plenty of phantom warnings.
But they were more of an overreaction to cars exiting or not exactly in their lane.
Where the Model 3 appears to do it for no reason at all out of the blue.
So, is the idea that the switch from 2.0 to 3.0 will happen when 3.0 is released or only when the FSD feature is released? I would pay $5,000 to get the 3.0 early without the FSD features if that was possible. I think though, that there will be no upgrade until FSD actually exists. Thoughts?
Why would you want it ahead of FSD through? The only reason HW3 exists is to give the additional computing power and redundancy required for FSD. I really doubt there’d be any noticeable difference in the interface just clicking around without FSD engaged.
Dan Detweiler
Active Member
Remember, they can release any FSD features they want and just require due diligence by the driver (similar to what they do now) and be fine without regulatory clearance. We very well may see features unique to FSD released quite soon that would make the option worth the money for those of us that already bought it.
Dan
HW2.X runs most of the cameras at low resolution and low framerates, due to limited processing power. From what I recall, the HW2.X neural network runs only one camera at full 1280x960 resolution @ 25fps and runs the rest of the cameras at 1/2 to 1/4 resolution and lower framerates. Elon has suggested that the HW3 neural network will run all 8 cameras at the full resolution and framerate (1280x960 @ 30fps). Even absent new features, I expect processing all cameras at their full resolution and frame rate will improve AP performance, blind spot detection, windshield wiper performance, safety, etc, by some amount.
Last edited:
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
They can release it but the NHTSA can force them to remove it. I'm of the opinion that adding stop sign and stop light recognition to EAP would make the car less safe. If it does then the NHTSA will make regulations banning those features.
Similar threads
