TACC should be standard on Model S without EAP

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Show me one video from Tesla showing off FSD with press in the car, rather than some engineer that got to try it 100 times and then splice together a demo video. Yes the Nissan self-driving is not finished yet, but it sure looks way ahead of the FSD that Tesla has demonstrated so far. And if you really think Tesla will deliver "car sharing and ride hailing" on AP2 hardware cars as per the FSD description on their website, you already drunk the hype CoolAid.

Tesla has AP2 in is product that it's selling. You know what the price is. It just needs to (get and) stay ahead of other real products on the market. It's improving. Don't know how good it'll get, or whether the hardware is fundamentally capable of FSD and the only thing they'd need is redundancy.

Those systems on the Nissan Leaf, the Bolt and the Google-mobile are all currently more capable than AP2 but you can't buy them. Their investments in R&D are currently earning them $0.

So, you have manufacturers falling over each other to show you how great their unfinished autonomous systems will be once you can buy them. But none of them is saying how much the systems will cost and sadly (but not unexpectedly) journalists aren't asking the hard questions about cost, despite the fact that it's the system cost that will determine the disruption.

People should be as skeptical of autonomy as they are of HFCV.

 

[McRat]

If the ACC is properly calibrated, I can't see how it wouldn't be almost as efficient in an EV due to regen braking taking care of most of the slowing. I agree if its racing forward to close a gap and then slamming on the friction brakes it will be inefficient but that's also how I observe most people drive in stop and go for some reason.

Because it tries to maintain a distance by using excessive acceleration and excessive regen. If you let the distance float, you will go further.

Try it. Don't take my word for it. For me it's the difference between 58 miles and 70 miles on the same amount of power and ETA.

 

[zer0cool]

TACC or similar options are not standard on any premium car. They generally cost thousands... Tesla brand is positioned to be a premium car, so it's not going to give away this option that Germans charge thousands on for free.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Show me one video from Tesla showing off FSD with press in the car, rather than some engineer that got to try it 100 times and then splice together a demo video. Yes the Nissan self-driving is not finished yet, but it sure looks way ahead of the FSD that Tesla has demonstrated so far. And if you really think Tesla will deliver "car sharing and ride hailing" on AP2 hardware cars as per the FSD description on their website, you already drunk the hype CoolAid.

Tesla has AP2 in is product that it's selling. You know what the price is. It just needs to (get and) stay ahead of other real products on the market. It's improving. Don't know how good it'll get, or whether the hardware is fundamentally capable of FSD and the only thing they'd need is redundancy.

Those systems on the Nissan Leaf, the Bolt and the Google-mobile are all currently more capable than AP2 but you can't buy them. Their investments in R&D are currently earning them $0.

So, you have manufacturers falling over each other to show you how great their unfinished autonomous systems will be once you can buy them. But none of them is saying how much the systems will cost and sadly (but not unexpectedly) journalists aren't asking the hard questions about cost, despite the fact that it's the system cost that will determine the disruption.

People should be as skeptical of autonomy as they are of HFCV.

 

[McRat]

If the ACC is properly calibrated, I can't see how it wouldn't be almost as efficient in an EV due to regen braking taking care of most of the slowing. I agree if its racing forward to close a gap and then slamming on the friction brakes it will be inefficient but that's also how I observe most people drive in stop and go for some reason.

Because it tries to maintain a distance by using excessive acceleration and excessive regen. If you let the distance float, you will go further.

Try it. Don't take my word for it. For me it's the difference between 58 miles and 70 miles on the same amount of power and ETA.

 

[McRat]

A 27k car has it. But a 100k car does not. Tesla is really overcharging.

But that $27,895? car has the power of a $13k car. So you're paying $14,000 for ACC in an econobox.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Show me one video from Tesla showing off FSD with press in the car, rather than some engineer that got to try it 100 times and then splice together a demo video. Yes the Nissan self-driving is not finished yet, but it sure looks way ahead of the FSD that Tesla has demonstrated so far. And if you really think Tesla will deliver "car sharing and ride hailing" on AP2 hardware cars as per the FSD description on their website, you already drunk the hype CoolAid.

Tesla has AP2 in is product that it's selling. You know what the price is. It just needs to (get and) stay ahead of other real products on the market. It's improving. Don't know how good it'll get, or whether the hardware is fundamentally capable of FSD and the only thing they'd need is redundancy.

Those systems on the Nissan Leaf, the Bolt and the Google-mobile are all currently more capable than AP2 but you can't buy them. Their investments in R&D are currently earning them $0.

Autonomy is the next big thing in the automotive industry. It's at a time when electrification is poised to make a bunch of IP redundant or significantly diminish its value. So you have manufacturers falling over each other to show you how great their unfinished autonomous systems will be once you can buy them. Oh, they're soooo close. But none of them is saying how much the systems will cost and sadly (but not unexpectedly) journalists aren't asking the hard questions about cost, despite the fact that it's the system cost that will determine the disruption.

Even if a manufacturer can successfully deliver an autonomous system, its value would drop precipitously if another manufacturer can undercut their cost significantly. Which of course brings us back to Tesla's approach, which is _deliberately_ intended not just to aim to achieve autonomy, but to do so at the lowest cost possible.

 

[gowthamn]

Because it tries to maintain a distance by using excessive acceleration and excessive regen. If you let the distance float, you will go further.

Try it. Don't take my word for it. For me it's the difference between 58 miles and 70 miles on the same amount of power and ETA.

Yes, higher the car lengths less the jerkiness.

 

[gowthamn]

Because it tries to maintain a distance by using excessive acceleration and excessive regen. If you let the distance float, you will go further.

Try it. Don't take my word for it. For me it's the difference between 58 miles and 70 miles on the same amount of power and ETA.

Yes, higher the car lengths less the jerkiness.

 

[McRat]

Yes, higher the car lengths less the jerkiness.

And this is where the problem occurs. The lower the regen kW and lower the accel kW the less losses occur. Power makes heat, heat increases resistance, higher resistance shows more losses.

A fixed distance ACC will go higher in both directions than allowing the following distance to vary naturally with a trained foot.

It's not new though, or unique to EVs. People have known for decades that cruise control on an empty highway with hills will consume more fuel. Only on level ground can it match a trained foot. Hills emulate variations in traffic speeds. When towing heavy, I drive using an EGT gauge. This means I'll lose some speed climbing, but coast downhill. The EGT gauge tells me how much fuel is being consumed.

 

[SageBrush]

If you want TACC, open up your checkbook. Tesla isn't about freebies. These shareholders need their return on investment. That doesn't come by giving things out for free. All VW gives us for free is 40x NOx and SO2. Thanks VW!

That was funny, thanks

Just to be contrary though, I'll mention that 40x is the maximum found on testing and 6x is average. Before you say something you might regret though, you may wish to check out Nox emissions from a coal power plant and convert that to a per mile ratio for a Tesla.

 

[stopcrazypp]

A friend of mine has just bought a VW Tiguan (approx 30k) and he has TACC as standard. It's a great system - maintaining a programmable gap and slowing to a stop in traffic.

I don't think it's right to charge an extra 5k for people who want this feature on a Model S. The hardware is all there.

I'm hoping that as the software development gets funded by more customers with Model 3 coming online that we'll see more standard features and a drop in the price of the EAP upgrade.

I take it you don't buy a lot of premium cars? Sorry, the "my economy car has this feature for half the price, why isn't this standard on a premium car?" argument is old hat, and doesn't work.

I just went to BMW's site and tried to configure a 7 series (starts $83k). To get ACC, you need the $1700 Driving Assistance Package + $1700 Driving Assistance Plus Package ($3400 total).
Build Your Own BMW - BMW North America

 

[SageBrush]

I just went to BMW's site and tried to configure a 7 series (starts $83k). To get ACC, you need the $1700 Driving Assistance Package + $1700 Driving Assistance Plus Package ($3400 total).
Build Your Own BMW - BMW North America

Interesting observation, but

1. I would be happy for Tesla to not use BMW as any kind of model to emulate
2. The Model 3 is not supposed to be a premium car (at least in my view.) It is meant to be a mainstream car with a Tesla drivetrain, Tesla electric connector, and enough battery capacity to enable practical Supercharger use.

 

[⚡️ELECTROMAN⚡️]

A 27k car has it. But a 100k car does not. Tesla is really overcharging.

It's not a $100,000 car. Tired of the $100,000 Car

 

[stopcrazypp]

Interesting observation, but

1. I would be happy for Tesla to not use BMW as any kind of model to emulate
2. The Model 3 is not supposed to be a premium car (at least in my view.) It is meant to be a mainstream car with a Tesla drivetrain, Tesla electric connector, and enough battery capacity to enable practical Supercharger use.

1. I'm not saying Tesla should aim for it, but just saying that argument doesn't fly for anyone who has shopped in the premium car market. Many features are optional or cost more.

2. The Model 3 has continually been said to aim for the A4 or 3 series, which are premium cars. I've talked about this a lot of times, Tesla isn't trying to build an economy car with a $10k-$20k "EV premium" as other companies are doing. That seems to be a recipe for low sales, since the general public doesn't value the EV part that highly. Rather, by aiming at entry level premium (which typically are stripped at $35k), it gives a better chance of matching those competitors.

Also for the subject of this thread, the Model S is definitely not aimed at the economy market.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Interesting observation, but

1. I would be happy for Tesla to not use BMW as any kind of model to emulate
2. The Model 3 is not supposed to be a premium car (at least in my view.) It is meant to be a mainstream car with a Tesla drivetrain, Tesla electric connector, and enough battery capacity to enable practical Supercharger use.

It's a premium car. But then, base BMW 3 series aren't exactly fancy.

Tesla isn't going to go mainstream. Any company that really believes in cheap autonomy should be focused purely on building premium vehicles and utilitarian taxis because that's where you're likely to end up.

(And apologies for the duplicate posts Had some posting trouble. Mods are free to clean up)

 

[SageBrush]

2. The Model 3 has continually been said to aim for the A4 or 3 series,

Fair point. I looked up the Audi A4. TACC is an $1800 option only available on the 'Prestige' model so effectively closing in on $50k.

 

[sakimano]

Yes it's only available with the Enhance Autopilot option costing 5k with the order or 6k if added after. I don't want self-driving or auto-steer but adaptive cruise would be really handy and is a low cost option / standard on many cars these dates.

just get it. For two reasons

1. whenever you sell your car you'll get most of it back. If it depreciates 40% in 4 years, you'll have paid $2000 for autopilot, TACC and the rest. Not bad.
2. you will enjoy the hell out of autopilot and wonder how you almost bought the car without it.

 

[jddssc121]

TACC or similar options are not standard on any premium car. They generally cost thousands... Tesla brand is positioned to be a premium car, so it's not going to give away this option that Germans charge thousands on for free.

you can get it as a $1,000 option on a base model $24K Honda Accord. Hell, it's a $1K option on a base model $20K Civic.

 

[pilotSteve]

Model 3 will not be able to charge such high prices. Check out Bolt option prices (including options Tesla doesn't offer, like surround vision. And before I get flamed by Tesla fanboys that you don't need surround because FSD will just drive and perfectly park the car by itself - please hold off on those until Tesla actually does that). Once the competition catches up with EV technology, including charging networks, Tesla will have to offer significantly better products at a much cheaper price to compete. And for those who think AutoPilot is Tesla's ace in the hole, check out this video a self-driving Nissan Leaf (to be released in 2020) - that was with press in the car, not a spliced up, edited video like Tesla's. The competition is not sitting idle, they just don't hype up their dreams like Elon Musk on twitter.

Amazing, *THIS* is what I hope I bought with my FSD purchase!!

 

[DevFonzy]

+1 for having TACC as base package or additional add on when not interested in EAP.

 

[whitex]

Tesla has AP2 in is product that it's selling.

Yea, and Virgin Galactic is selling tickets to space:
Fly with Us - Virgin Galactic
I guess that puts them ahead of SpaceX in your book.

Don't know how good [AP2 will] get, or whether the hardware is fundamentally capable of FSD and the only thing they'd need is redundancy.

You are correct on the first part. At this time it does same or less than a single-camera MobileEye based AP1, and gotta tell you, having had AP1 for a while, it's ions away from unattended driving.

Those systems on the Nissan Leaf, the Bolt and the Google-mobile are all currently more capable than AP2 but you can't buy them. Their investments in R&D are currently earning them $0.

Maybe because they don't want to sell people a feature that does absolutely nothing, such as was AP2 when launched. The fact that Tesla is collecting money for AP2 may actually come back to bite them in the future, even though they've safeguarded themselves with fine print disclaimers that will outlive anyone who purchased an AP2 car (in year 2090 they can still hide behind the "subject to verification and regulatory approval").

So, you have manufacturers falling over each other to show you how great their unfinished autonomous systems will be once you can buy them.

So is Tesla, except their "how great it will be" video is not as great, so instead they hype by implying on their site and via Elon's tweets that you'll be sleep while the car drives you somewhere, and that you can hail a Tesla from home to come pick you up - and all of that with AP2 hardware.

But none of them is saying how much the systems will cost and sadly (but not unexpectedly) journalists aren't asking the hard questions about cost, despite the fact that it's the system cost that will determine the disruption.

Yes, the other guys show functionality but not price, while Tesla gives you the price but cannot demonstrate the functionality. Neither have an autonomous car on the market. SpaceX is going to space to day but doesn't sell tickets to the public, Virgin Galactic sells tickets but isn't quite as far as SpaceX - similar situation, you cannot buy a ticket and go to space today.

People should be as skeptical of autonomy as they are of HFCV.

I think they should be more skeptical. My original point was that Tesla has an advantage in the BEV field, but only a perceived advantage in the autonomous driving. Once the rest of the competitors catch up on the BEV, Tesla will not have the advantage and therefore will not be able to charge $5K for TACC - nothing to do with whether it's a fair price or not, simply what happens in a free market.

 

[Canuck]

A friend of mine has just bought a VW Tiguan (approx 30k) and he has TACC as standard.

How much are the batteries in that vehicle?

Tesla needs cash and a lot is riding on the amount of cash that is brought in on the Model 3 vs. expenses.

VW hasn't built a battery gigafactory and has a long history of selling vehicles, and building up cash reserves, and a more recent history of intentionally misleading consumers and regulators when it comes to emissions. If you like your friend's VW with TACC for $30k you can always buy it instead of a Model 3 but you wouldn't catch me walking into one of their showrooms.

Tesla is banking on the fact that enough people are willing to pay for it, and would rather do so, than drive an ICE where you can perhaps get it included in the price.

Once the rest of the competitors catch up on the BEV, Tesla will not have the advantage and therefore will not be able to charge $5K for TACC - nothing to do with whether it's a fair price or not, simply what happens in a free market.

Good - this is what we want and what Tesla wants. In the meantime, however, Tesla needs cash and like you say, the free market will allow it -- for now at least.

But I would just add that the competitors also need to catch up on building a fast charging network, with large banks of maintained fast chargers, before there will be any true competitor to Tesla, at least in my view.