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

Tesla BEV Competition Developments

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
How would he know that?

Same place everyone gets their info since Tesla stopped releasing CT reservation information.

Surveys from cybertruckownersclub dot com. This is where the "over 2M reservations" comes from.

Sandy's opinion on engineering should carry much more weight than the average armchair automotive CEO.

But when it comes to predicting market trends, particularly far into the future, Sandy's opinion should carry the same weight as every other close follower of the industry.

Sandy thinks he is Nostradamus because he correctly predicted a major jihadi terrorist attack before 9/11. Just like most Western intelligence agencies predicted if a Western coalition invaded the Arab heartlands, which came to pass in Iraq.

I strongly disagree that CT is the next Pacer.

And I strongly disagree that CT Job 1 is the forerunner to Bankruptcy for GM, Ford, Stellantis, and Rivian. This might have happened if CT Job 1 was 3 years ago and Tesla started ramping hard after that.

I do think CT will take more sales from Subaru, Jeep, Audi All Road, Toyota TRD etc than Ford, Chevrolet, GMC, and RAM pickups. Another big market is current Tesla owners that also own a pickup.
 
If robo-taxies ever happen. FSD without a driver could end up being one of those things like fusion power and flying cars, always just around the corner. FSD has been that sort of promise for several years now.

I think regulators will never approve FSD without a driver always watching and able to take over because the software will never be able to handle every edge condition.


While I agree FSD isn't nearly as solved as anybody seems to think- and having been in the beta for a while it's not Coming Soon- the regulator bit is 100% a red herring.

It's legal right now in at least half a dozen US states with no additional "approval" needed from anybody. If you had a working RT today you could deploy it TODAY (or in a couple states simply by submitting a form saying you were doing so without needing them to "approve" it).


Nobody has- because nobody has a working one they trust enough to deploy widely like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doggydogworld
While I agree FSD isn't nearly as solved as anybody seems to think- and having been in the beta for a while it's not Coming Soon- the regulator bit is 100% a red herring.

It's legal right now in at least half a dozen US states with no additional "approval" needed from anybody. If you had a working RT today you could deploy it TODAY (or in a couple states simply by submitting a form saying you were doing so without needing them to "approve" it).


Nobody has- because nobody has a working one they trust enough to deploy widely like that.
The reason nobody will dare to deploy systems for a long while (even if/when technology becomes safer than human drivers) is liability. If there is any accident, lawyers will go after the car manufacturer with huge damage claims, just because the car makers have deep pockets. You can't expect to get many $$$ millions from Joe X driver, but you can from multi-billion $$$ car companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KJD
Tesla might be reckless enough to allow FSD on city streets without a driver. The lawsuits after the first accident might be the only thing that could drive the company out of business at this point.

The ambulance chasers are going to swarm all over the first driverless FSD crashes. And the car maker might be liable for pushing out the software without adequate debugging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KJD
Tesla might be reckless enough to allow FSD on city streets without a driver. The lawsuits after the first accident might be the only thing that could drive the company out of business at this point.

The ambulance chasers are going to swarm all over the first driverless FSD crashes. And the car maker might be liable for pushing out the software without adequate debugging.


There's already been dozens of driverless accidents among those deploying/testing L4 robotaxis. Nobody's been sued out of business though.

Also, given all available stats show Teslas as the safest vehicles on the road, can you cite what leads you to your "tesla might be reckless enough" conclusion?
 
CT is a pretty big jump in size from those vehicles as well as vehicle type. Jeep does sell some pickups but I think a small amount compared to their other vehicles.

I think these are the types of folks that appreciate the utility of four wheel drive full size trucks but have up till now refused to buy full size trucks because they are gas guzzlers. For a combination of environmental/ running cost/image reasons.

Cybertruck will remedy those concerns.

BTW How many people replaced a 195.9" or longer sedan with a first generation Tesla Model S? There were a lot of BMW 3 Series, Honda Civic/Accords, Toyota Corolla/Camry/Prius , Nissan LEAFs and famously Chrysler Minivans.
 
Last edited:
I think these are the types of folks that appreciate the utility of four wheel drive full size trucks but have up till now refused to buy full size trucks because they are gas guzzlers.
Quite a few assumptions there, plus most Jeep vehicles aren't very efficient. Sure there will be some converts from the group you mention but I think most will be former truck owners.
 
There's already been dozens of driverless accidents among those deploying/testing L4 robotaxis. Nobody's been sued out of business though.

Also, given all available stats show Teslas as the safest vehicles on the road, can you cite what leads you to your "tesla might be reckless enough" conclusion?

From a legal liability point of view, there is a massive step from L4 to L5. With L4, there needs to be a driver there watching the car and able to take over if the car does something wrong. When an L4 car gets in an accident, the driver gets sued for not paying adequate attention because watching the computer drive the car is their job in the driver's seat.

When an L5 car gets in an accident, there is no driver to sue and the car was expected to be able to handle all driving situations with no human intervention. The fault is with the programmers and engineers who designed the system and the company that signed off on that system is the one who will get sued. It was their responsibility to fully test the system and ensure the car would do the right thing in every situation that it would encounter.

Without reliable L5, the whole robo-taxi idea is DOA. Cheap robo-taxis are predicated on driverless cars. With any kind of taxi or ride share today, a large chunk of what you pay is for the driver to drive the car. With L4 robo-taxis, they will cost the same and the only difference is the driver will be bored spitless most of the time. Which will lead to more chatty drivers and lower popularity among people who don't want to chat while being taken somewhere.

There is a catch 22 here, robo-taxis need L5, but introducing L5 will create a huge liability risk for the manufacturer and a regulatory problem for jurisdictions. When there are L5 accidents, some people are going to sue lax jurisdictions that allowed it without adequate consideration of the risks and they might win. If there is enough public outcry some of those jurisdictions might change their laws to make L5 more difficult before it becomes more widespread.

There is a segment of early adopter types who are gung ho for robo-taxis, but the bulk of the public is skeptical and fearful. I bought my Model S in 2016 after I found that it was superior to an ICE in every way except refueling time. None of my neighbors have changed their opinions on EVs since, even as I've tried to educate them. Some are all behind EVs, but they were before I got my car, but some just won't be budged from the ICE mindset. They lack the imagination to see the benefits.

And that doesn't have the memes that AI has. We have been subjected to many decades of stories about AIs doing nefarious things. People can tolerate AIs when they are in control, but people get more nervous when their lives are being put into AI's control. There are many, many stories about AI's going rogue and killing people.

The stories about AP accidents made headlines because the public devour stories about AIs killing people, even if it was the human's fault. Stories about humans doing stupid, dangerous things in cars make headlines less often because unless someone does something spectacularly dangerous, humans being dangerous blend into the background of everyday life.

Additionally one human doing something stupid in New Jersey has no effect on me. Unless it's a Tik Tok challenge or something, that person is not putting anyone around here in danger. But an AI rolled out to a fleet of cars is the same software everywhere, so an AI going berserk in New Jersey has the potential to be dangerous to me because there are cars here in Washington with the same software.

On top of the public being nervous about AIs going rogue, driving jobs are a large segment of the workforce and eliminating drivers is going to result in a lot of unemployment. That is going to cause resistance from the people who drive for a living. They will campaign for laws forcing L4 until AI driving is "proven safe". With the public already hinky, those laws will likely pass in a lot of places.

I think these are the types of folks that appreciate the utility of four wheel drive full size trucks but have up till now refused to buy full size trucks because they are gas guzzlers. For a combination of environmental/ running cost/image reasons.

Cybertruck will remedy those concerns.

BTW How many people replaced a 195.9" or longer sedan with a first generation Tesla Model S? There were a lot of BMW 3 Series, Honda Civic/Accords, Toyota Corolla/Camry/Prius , Nissan LEAFs and famously Chrysler Minivans.

I downsized. I went from a Buick Roadmaster to a Model S. The wheelbase is the same and the body width is the same. The Model S is overall shorter.
 
Quite a few assumptions there, plus most Jeep vehicles aren't very efficient. Sure there will be some converts from the group you mention but I think most will be former truck owners.

All predictions about the future have assumptions.

Mass conversion of Detroit 3 truck owners with the highest loyalty rates of any products is a whole lotta assumptions.

On average Jeep vehicles are significantly more efficient than full size trucks.

The brand new Wagoneers being the exception.
 
From a legal liability point of view, there is a massive step from L4 to L5. With L4, there needs to be a driver there watching the car and able to take over if the car does something wrong.

This is flat out false.

L4, by definition, can never require a human to be safe.

And multiple companies are running L4 cars without drivers in them. Today. With public passengers.


Didn't bother addressing the rest of the post since it's entirely based on a false premise.


EDIT- Shout out for the Roadmaster thing though-- used to have a '94 wagon myself... along with a much more highly modified '95 Impala SS.
 
This is flat out false.

L4, by definition, can never require a human to be safe.

And multiple companies are running L4 cars without drivers in them. Today. With public passengers.


Didn't bother addressing the rest of the post since it's entirely based on a false premise.


EDIT- Shout out for the Roadmaster thing though-- used to have a '94 wagon myself... along with a much more highly modified '95 Impala SS.
@wdolson had an off by one error...
L4 should be L3, L5 should be L4
 
@wdolson had an off by one error...
L4 should be L3, L5 should be L4


Well, 2 things


First, that makes a vast, vast, difference to his entire argument. Since AFAIK nobody is deploying, or even intending to deploy, L3 robotaxis.

Second- even then he's still wrong :)

L3 does not require the human to "be there watching the car" constantly.

By definition in L3 you do not need to constantly pay attention

You could be reading a book paying 0 attention to what the car is doing in an L3 vehicle.


The only thing the human needs to do is be available respond to the car asking them to take over, and NOT instantly.

For example if the L3 system was highway only, it might prompt them to take over as it's exiting the freeway, but until prompted they could be playing a game on their phone.




What he's ACTUALLY describing, where the human ALWAYS has to be paying attention and instantly ready to do something, is L2.

Which is what Tesla (and tons of other car makers, with lesser but still L2 systems) already has deployed.
 
I think these are the types of folks that appreciate the utility of four wheel drive full size trucks but have up till now refused to buy full size trucks because they are gas guzzlers. For a combination of environmental/ running cost/image reasons.

Cybertruck will remedy those concerns.

BTW How many people replaced a 195.9" or longer sedan with a first generation Tesla Model S? There were a lot of BMW 3 Series, Honda Civic/Accords, Toyota Corolla/Camry/Prius , Nissan LEAFs and famously Chrysler Minivans.
I might be crazy but, I owned a Prius and a LEAF before buying a Model S.

It appears to me that the Lightning and the R1T and the Cybertruck will all be in short supply for the next 3 or 4 years.
 
Back when Tesla commented on such things, Elon never mentioned Buick Roadmaster as one of the top sources of Model S conquest sales. :cool:

There are always outliers.

I'm probably the only person in the world who went from a Roadmaster to a Model S. Especially since I bought it new in 1992.

I glossed the levels before replying, but didn't read them in enough depth. This definition of Level 4 says

Level 4: High Automation​


The vehicle is capable of performing all driving functions under certain conditions. The driver may have the option to control the vehicle.


What It Means to You


An ADS on the vehicle can perform all driving tasks and monitor the driving environment — essentially, do all the driving — in certain circumstances. The human need not pay attention in those circumstances.

Bolding added by me. Right now the circumstances where L4 can be done is fairly limited. Waymo is doing some L4 in Arizona. I doubt those cars are out on the road during monsoon season. I don't think anybody has tried anything more than safe, unpopulated L4 testing in conditions such as fog or snow.

I read that the Waymo cars within their geofenced network in good weather are driving without drivers. We'll see what happens when one of those vehicles get into an accident. The company that developed the equipment are going to get sued because there is no human driver to sue.