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

Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
What kinda processing is needed to “see” to drive at that speed, constant?

I dunno. I know I'm not checking my phone at 140 mph (or at 14 mph). :D

Elon did say the FSD beta would spawn a new neural net to closely examine traffic for unprotected left turns. I expect they could do something similar for hi-spd driving. However, if the range of the camera is just 250 m that won't help much (reaction time vs vision distance).

The larger question is, why would FSD need to drive that fast? Yeah, it doesn't when you're working on a notebook, playing a video game, or having a refreshing nap. Maybe some version of battlebots racing league will do that, but I certainly won't be putting any 12-yr-olds in the car (they just want the screen, anyway).

Cheers!
 
Last edited:
The longest range camera on the Tesla has a range of 250 m (820 ft). At 200 mph, that distance is covered in 2.8 seconds.

I don't know about you, but I've never driven even 70% of that speed, but even then I'm looking 10 seconds down the road (or further). And I'm not depending on my reaction time, I'm depending upon my vision.

I'm not even going to talk about energy gradients, but I remind you that KE = 1/2 m v^2

I learned along time ago, "never outdrive your vision".
The camera has an ~infinite range, it can see the sun which is far away etc. The 250m is what Mobileye or someone said that their neural network could accurately detect vehicles at. I assume with bigger neural network, with autolabelled data(4D, RNN etc), with the BEV-network having 250m+ output, the neural network will be able to accurately output vehicle detections at a longer range in most highway situations.
 
The 250m is what Mobileye or someone said that their neural network could accurately detect vehicles at.
No, that's what Tesla says on their website:

"Eight surround cameras provide 360 degrees of visibility around the car at up to 250 meters of range."​

I expect it comes down to the size of an object in pixels at max distance. It's not a focus issue, it's a resolution issue.

Cheers!
 
You commonly post youtube CNBC content with explanations like "CNBC 2 hours ago", that isn't contextual in any way, all I can tell from your post is you posted some sort of CNBC youtube video, I have to watch several minutes of it to even have a clue what you thought was interesting or informative in it.

Twitter links may or may not be as bad. If you link to a feed and I come by your post after the fact your link takes me to the feed not to the thing you thought was interesting or informative.

If the link is a proper link to a post I can open it in a new tab and figure out what you linked to but as it was today I saw 3 posts from 3 different people with links to twitter and no contextual clue if they had linked to similar content, double posted the same content, or were all unrelated.

TMC software takes your link, pulls some content, modifies the link and then presents it to the people that come along afterward.

Not everyone on the internet sees the same content, How they view it: laptop, desktop, phone, or car. The browser and internet used affect what they see. When they view it: same day, hours later, days later can affect it also. If you don't care how your content comes across you can ignore my feedback.

In general, I've noticed Curt typically provides good context for his links. And I appreciate that.
 
The Mach-e that came close to the model 3 in the Range test not only did it from a slightly larger battery (88KW vs the 82KW model 3), but also by being a more efficient single motor variant. (The dual motor LR Mach-e had significantly less range).

Did Tesla increase the useable size of the Model 3 battery pack? 88 kWh is the useable size of the Mach-e and I've always heard 75 kWh quoted as the useable size of the Model 3's. Where are you getting the 82 kWh figure?
 
Did Tesla increase the useable size of the Model 3 battery pack? 88 kWh is the useable size of the Mach-e and I've always heard 75 kWh quoted as the useable size of the Model 3's. Where are you getting the 82 kWh figure?
Yes Tesla did increase the MOdel 3 to 82kwh through density, so total cells are still probably the same.
Also we are not sure about Mach-E's usable size because even though it's stated as 88kwh, the total pack is 98.8kwh and may tap into reserves when you do run it down to zero tests.

 
Last edited:
Ah sorry I just saw those figures mentioned for the two vehicles, happy to be corrected on the comparable “usable“ capacities.

It looks like you had the right number. Tesla moves so fast it's hard to keep up with all the improvements.

And that's a good point by @Singuy , that we don't know the true useable size of the Mach-e pack. It's hard to believe they would leave so much unused energy on the table. Because that's dollars down the drain. This is what you do when you have low confidence in what kind of pack longevity you can expect given the BMS parameters and the effectiveness of your thermal management system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UkNorthampton
Elon:
Me:
6BDBB6EC-1FBC-4E97-AC50-C630837959CB.jpeg
 
Last edited:
My brother : I think my next car is going to be a hybrid
Me : You should go all electric. Hybrids are too complicated
Bro : I don't want to spend $100K on a car
Me : Model Y is 50K and Model 3 is even less than that
Bro : Really? I thought they were $100K+. I'm going to check it out.

That's how we get to $3000/share+. 1 convert at a time
 
Model X is a different vehicle entirely, 4680 might be a good fit, but that means making 2 kinds of Model S/X packs not one..
I understand that Tesla have never really bottomed out the manufacturing accuracy for the falcon wing doors reliably. Another reason for the delayed X rollout could be waiting for castings - which have rumoured benefits for manufacturing accuracy.
 
I understand that Tesla have never really bottomed out the manufacturing accuracy for the falcon wing doors reliably. Another reason for the delayed X rollout could be waiting for castings - which have rumoured benefits for manufacturing accuracy.
Anything is possible, IMO one factor is they want to fully ramp Model S first, so they are not working on 2 substantial ramps in parallel.
Under the covers I think more has changed, Warren's video posted earlier provides some details:-

My best guess is they haven't told Warren everything, so lots of little changes new components, new processes, perhaps some issues in obtaining parts in time.

Like Model S, I think they will be hoping to fix everything in Model X that needs fixing... and probably trying to simplify some aspects of building the X.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kbM3