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

Subscribed to FSD, Very disappointed...

So, I know this isn't the FSD Beta, but if there is a trickle down of software to the features that were available, I am incredibly disappointed. I just took a 1000 mile trip and there are so many errors and bugs that I just preferred to turn off NoAP and drive on my own. List of things I noticed in no particular order.

  1. The car would randomly throw me out of NoAP and lock me out for the rest of the drive several times. Even with hands on the wheel and looking forward. I thought there was a bomb in my car or an alien attack or something because it just randomly went to red alert.
  2. I turned off the "react to traffic signal" feature or whatever it was called. It would stop at every traffic signal or perceived traffic signal, even if it was stale green light. I'd have to take control anyway.
  3. Auto lane change with stalk confirmation should just be standard on regular AP. I mean come on...
  4. When a car moves out of the way or there is a lane change to go around a slower car... Then flippin' GO! My car would hang out at that low speed after the lane change (or other car move over) for as much as 30 seconds even if the entire lane ahead is clear. I timed it. If someone is going 51mph on the freeway, getting into the fast lane and also hanging out at 51mph for that long won't work.
  5. Similar to #4 but with cars crossing your path. Slamming on the brakes way too soon or after the car has cleared my path and wasn't even close. ...then taking forever to accelerate back to speed.
  6. PHANTOM BRAKING!!!! Slamming on brakes randomly at freeway speeds is a safety concern.
  7. It was unclear WHY some highways were NoAP while the same highway 5 miles up was just AP. I get this isn't city streets FSD, but...consistency would be nice.
  8. Lane change issues. Sometimes in NoAP, it would just refuse to lane change. As in the visualization wouldn't come it and it just stayed in place. Had to take over. Oddly enough, sometimes on regular AP, it would allow auto lane change sometimes, but only changing lane to the right. Never to the left. It was unclear why. Some consistency would be helpful.
  9. Lane centering on some sweeping curves still isn't great. On roads with no shoulder and a hard divider, my tires would go over the outside line of a turn at the end and I had to correct otherwise I might have lost a mirror. At the beginning of the turn, I also preferred to take over because I got too close to the inside lane of the turn almost hitting another car.
There are others, but these are the ones I could remember. Look, I'm on my 2nd Tesla. No other car I'd want. I believe in this style of achieving autonomous driving and praise Tesla and the team for all the progress made so far. I made a 12 hr drive with very little fatigue compared to ICE car which is amazing (perhaps that was the forced 30 min breaks to charge every so often and not the NoAP?)...AND this system was in no way better than myself in driving, aside from being less fatiguing (which is a separate issue). No way I'd get in an autonomous car with this current software. I think the language that it is "100x safer than an human" or whatever is incredibly misleading because in every dangerous situation, I had to take over, anyway. So if AP is only doing the easy stuff with caution programming over 9000, and humans are running the whole spread, then yeah, I'm sure it's safer on paper. And between the phantom braking and refusal to get up to speed, it arguably put me in more danger. I think we need to change the measuring standard and language from safer to... functional? Driveable? Consistent? This was a fun little experiment I've had for a month, but in no way is it worth $200/month or $15,000. The utility score isn't high enough for me, yet, also not enough 9's behind that decimal point for me.
 

Tam

Well-Known Member
Nov 25, 2012
12,163
11,192
Visalia, CA
It is not an incremental update from original poster version. It is mostly different software and or software running in a completely different mode.
Completely different as in from radar version to pure vision version!

Completely different doesn't mean better as when pure vision took over: Lots of complaints, especially phantom brakes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QUBO
If people can do car analogies for other things, I can do a house analogy for a car 😁.

People buy houses, sight unseen, in the before-built state. One has to pay up front and, if one is lucky, there are plans that describe the house being built.

At that point, it's all about trust. Does one trust the builder? Are there houses out there that've been built that look OK? Any complaints, minor or major, about the builder's execution? In this kind of a situation, it's the buyer's job (not that all do it) to go out and go do some due diligence to make sure that the builder is on the level.

Even with that, there's acts of this and that that could kick in: While the house is being built, it could catch on fire. Unforeseen sinkholes could open up and swallow the property. Thieves could show and steal all the wood down to the foundations. For those reasons, it's not at all unusual to pay a heck of a lot less for a not-built-yet house. And one gets some bennies when doing that: Need a mud room and there isn't one? Catch that kind of thing early and it's lots cheaper than catching it late. Need an outlet somewhere? You get to say.

So, back to Tesla. Musk and his crowd had done the envelope scratching, came up with what they thought at the time was the necessary hardware to build an FSD car. No question: FSD is a research project. Nobody has done an FSD car like this before.

Due diligence time. How likely is it that the builder is going to come up with what they're proposing? There's lots of risks. The envelope scratching may have been dead wrong. Some alley in the blind alley sweepstakes may turn out that a human is actually required, make no mistake. And, if one is looking for naysayers, the Interwebs is loaded with them, from Ma and Pa Sixpack giving their gut feelings (ha!) to people with $RANDOM expertise saying it can't be done. Or can't be done in the next century. Or next ten years. Or whatever.

Thing is, in terms of the due diligence trust games, Musk has led a company that everybody swore up and down couldn't achieve a named goal that has actually done that thing: SpaceX. Um. In my opinion, that counts for a lot. Musk has a history of being a disruptor. And the fact that the world is going electric in spades is, well, due to Musk and his compatriots. And there were plenty of people who claimed at various times that the Roadster was garbage, the Model S was too expensive, and that nobody would buy the Model 3. Or Model Y, although that last didn't get the same BS level that the previous products did. There are still people out there claiming that the Semi will never make it; or that the Cybertruck will never see production.

Despite all the carping, Tesla has delivered products. Late maybe, but they have delivered. So, FSD may be a risky research project.. but Tesla is full of people who have delivered risky products, successfully. And another thing: When a company is a flat-out fraud (I'm looking at you, Enron and MCI), eventually a whistle-blower stands up and gives incontrovertible evidence that that's the case. I've been watching: There are, as I said, Interweb carpers out there.. but nobody from inside Tesla has declared it can't be done. Rather, the opposite. That's another good sign.

What about costs? Well, from our outside view, Tesla has at least been consistent. Early costs of FSD were in the $2k range. Elon stood up at one of those quarterly hoo-has and stated that, the closer they got to fruition on FSD, the more they were going to charge. And that has been happening, at least with the charges, anyway, implying that the Real Thing was and is coming. There are, in the offing, serious price hikes that have been telegraphed when (or if) the final, no driver's wheel version of the self-driving car appears, so they're not done yet. FSD is still somewhat affordable.. but if Tesla hits their break-through in, say, 2nd quarter of next year, it'll likely stop being something that people can afford to buy.

What's the timeline? A year or so, I think. And there's lots of people who think that the timeline is anywhere from a couple of months (sure...) to Never.

But FSD, as currently sold, isn't about what it does now. It's what it's going to do, later: Just like the house.

I understand the OP's disappointment about what the package in hand can do: but, no offense, what did you think you were buying? A completed package? Um. Not Yet.
 
If people can do car analogies for other things, I can do a house analogy for a car 😁.

People buy houses, sight unseen, in the before-built state. One has to pay up front and, if one is lucky, there are plans that describe the house being built.

At that point, it's all about trust. Does one trust the builder? Are there houses out there that've been built that look OK? Any complaints, minor or major, about the builder's execution? In this kind of a situation, it's the buyer's job (not that all do it) to go out and go do some due diligence to make sure that the builder is on the level.

Even with that, there's acts of this and that that could kick in: While the house is being built, it could catch on fire. Unforeseen sinkholes could open up and swallow the property. Thieves could show and steal all the wood down to the foundations. For those reasons, it's not at all unusual to pay a heck of a lot less for a not-built-yet house. And one gets some bennies when doing that: Need a mud room and there isn't one? Catch that kind of thing early and it's lots cheaper than catching it late. Need an outlet somewhere? You get to say.

So, back to Tesla. Musk and his crowd had done the envelope scratching, came up with what they thought at the time was the necessary hardware to build an FSD car. No question: FSD is a research project. Nobody has done an FSD car like this before.

Due diligence time. How likely is it that the builder is going to come up with what they're proposing? There's lots of risks. The envelope scratching may have been dead wrong. Some alley in the blind alley sweepstakes may turn out that a human is actually required, make no mistake. And, if one is looking for naysayers, the Interwebs is loaded with them, from Ma and Pa Sixpack giving their gut feelings (ha!) to people with $RANDOM expertise saying it can't be done. Or can't be done in the next century. Or next ten years. Or whatever.

Thing is, in terms of the due diligence trust games, Musk has led a company that everybody swore up and down couldn't achieve a named goal that has actually done that thing: SpaceX. Um. In my opinion, that counts for a lot. Musk has a history of being a disruptor. And the fact that the world is going electric in spades is, well, due to Musk and his compatriots. And there were plenty of people who claimed at various times that the Roadster was garbage, the Model S was too expensive, and that nobody would buy the Model 3. Or Model Y, although that last didn't get the same BS level that the previous products did. There are still people out there claiming that the Semi will never make it; or that the Cybertruck will never see production.

Despite all the carping, Tesla has delivered products. Late maybe, but they have delivered. So, FSD may be a risky research project.. but Tesla is full of people who have delivered risky products, successfully. And another thing: When a company is a flat-out fraud (I'm looking at you, Enron and MCI), eventually a whistle-blower stands up and gives incontrovertible evidence that that's the case. I've been watching: There are, as I said, Interweb carpers out there.. but nobody from inside Tesla has declared it can't be done. Rather, the opposite. That's another good sign.

What about costs? Well, from our outside view, Tesla has at least been consistent. Early costs of FSD were in the $2k range. Elon stood up at one of those quarterly hoo-has and stated that, the closer they got to fruition on FSD, the more they were going to charge. And that has been happening, at least with the charges, anyway, implying that the Real Thing was and is coming. There are, in the offing, serious price hikes that have been telegraphed when (or if) the final, no driver's wheel version of the self-driving car appears, so they're not done yet. FSD is still somewhat affordable.. but if Tesla hits their break-through in, say, 2nd quarter of next year, it'll likely stop being something that people can afford to buy.

What's the timeline? A year or so, I think. And there's lots of people who think that the timeline is anywhere from a couple of months (sure...) to Never.

But FSD, as currently sold, isn't about what it does now. It's what it's going to do, later: Just like the house.

I understand the OP's disappointment about what the package in hand can do: but, no offense, what did you think you were buying? A completed package? Um. Not Yet.
I think your analogy is painfully flawed, friend. It's not even about FSD, because I don't have the beta. The NoAP features didn't even work, and that's not in beta. This is more like buying a brand new house with 3 bathrooms, but once built the master bathroom has no toilet, and the guest bathroom has no hot water or shower. ...and the builder says , "look, we'll get around to installing a toilet and hot water at some point in the future. Think of it as an investment in your future." Your idea of buying now for *POTENTIAL* benefits later is an investment at best and gambling at worst. I'd rather my car not be in my investment portfolio.... and just be an appliance that works when I pay for it.
 

ammulder

3,X,FSD Beta
Supporting Member
Apr 11, 2019
1,585
6,305
Philly area
FSD beta is completely different software compared to non-beta, so it’s not really worth comparing the two and certainly not possible to draw conclusions about the beta while only trying the non-beta.

Also, the traffic light behavior you describe is working as intended -- with the non-beta you’re supposed to confirm a green light by tapping the accelerator, unless a car just in front of you leads you through the light. There should be a message to that effect on the screen.
 
FSD beta is completely different software compared to non-beta, so it’s not really worth comparing the two and certainly not possible to draw conclusions about the beta while only trying the non-beta.
I don't know if that's the best idea. The best way to advertise and justify the value of FSD is to give people a taste of it. If the appetizer is good, people will stay for dinner and dessert.

Word of mouth cuts both ways: While I advertised how awesome Tesla was to my parents and convinced them to buy one, I reported my extreme disappointment with renting FSD and showed them, neither of us are willing to buy it.
 
I don't know if that's the best idea. The best way to advertise and justify the value of FSD is to give people a taste of it. If the appetizer is good, people will stay for dinner and dessert.

Word of mouth cuts both ways: While I advertised how awesome Tesla was to my parents and convinced them to buy one, I reported my extreme disappointment with renting FSD and showed them, neither of us are willing to buy it.
Thankfully the subscription exists to try it. I subscribe to it for my next road trip but I'm really hoping Tesla figures out the archaic 'apply torque to the wheel' nonsense before then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DblOSmith

daniel

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2009
5,548
5,312
Kihei, HI
... So, back to Tesla. Musk and his crowd had done the envelope scratching, came up with what they thought at the time was the necessary hardware to build an FSD car. ...

But they didn't say "We think this is the hardware an FSD car will need" Musk stood up and stated as an absolute fact that the cars had all the necessary hardware. Turns out they didn't. Once FSD exists it is highly unlikely that it will even be possible to upgrade my car to the necessary hardware.

... Due diligence time. How likely is it that the builder is going to come up with what they're proposing? ...

I did my due diligence: I reasoned that it was simply not possible to know what hardware would be needed as long as the software did not yet exist. I further reasoned that it seemed unlikely that I would still own the car I was buying in 2018, when FSD did finally exist. Which is why I didn't buy FSD. But here's the thing: A smart buyer does their due diligence; but it's still criminally dishonest to lie about the product you're selling. And promising that the thing you hope to develop will actually be developed is lying.

... Thing is, in terms of the due diligence trust games, Musk has led a company that everybody swore up and down couldn't achieve a named goal that has actually done that thing: SpaceX. ...

Not true. "Everybody" did not "swear up and down" that you couldn't land a rocket, or that the Roadster was garbage. There were people who thought that, just as there are still people who think Teslas are garbage. But people have believed since the dawn of the space age that it would be possible to land a rocket. NASA chose not to pursue that goal due to costs and the computing power available fifty years ago.

...Despite all the carping, Tesla has delivered products. Late maybe, but they have delivered. ...

Yes, they have delivered on products that were new versions of things that have existed before. Even the Roadster was inspired by an existing car: the t-zero. Non-geofenced FSD is something nobody has yet achieved, and it's just not reasonable to believe that it could be developed in the sort of time frames that Musk keeps promising. Again, he never says "I think" or "I hope" or "I believe." He says "we WILL deliver..."

... What's the timeline? A year or so, I think. And there's lots of people who think that the timeline is anywhere from a couple of months (sure...) to Never.

True robotaxi-capable FSD in one year from now is ridiculously optimistic. Sure, there are people who believe any given thing one chooses to name. But this is a massively difficult endeavor. Ten years is an optimistic guess.

... But FSD, as currently sold, isn't about what it does now. It's what it's going to do, later: Just like the house.

I would say it's about what the car you are actually buying will be able to do. And in a decade very few people paying for FSD now will still own their cars. They'll have paid for something they never got.

Selling promises of something to be delivered at an unknown time in the future is inherently dishonest. Note that in commodities futures markets, contracts have clauses for failure to deliver. If you don't deliver on the contract date, there is a penalty clearly stated. Tesla is selling futures contracts for FSD with no delivery date, and no penalty for failure to deliver during your car's reasonably-expected lifetime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2101Guy

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top