Tried a FSD subscription. It's not worth it...

I bit the bullet and tried the FSD one-month subscription option for a 1700 mile road trip this past weekend in my 2020 Model 3 Standard Plus. My opinion: not worth it.

Full Self Driving is just a terrible name for what is essentially Autopilot+. I'd imagine your commute would need to involve nothing but freeway driving to get much benefit from a $200 a month subscription, and definitely not $12000.

Summon is one of those features that's neat to play with, and might come in handy once in a blue moon. I'd pay $5 to sneak the car out of a tight spot once in a while, but not a recurring subscription.

Navigate on autopilot did relieve the necessity to keep turning autopilot off and back on every time I wanted to change lanes, which begs the question of why Tesla requires you to turn the autopilot off and back on just to change lanes. The cruise control worked the same as before, and honestly, I can handle lane changes on my own.

Stoplight and stop sign handling was terrible. It ID'd stop signs that weren't there, stopped the car in the middle of a highway, and tries to stop for most green lights unless you remember to tell it not to. It stopped for no reason multiple times during the trip. This in turn caused more safety hazards than if I just disabled it to begin with.

Autopilot is generally a great tool. You can turn it on, pay attention, and not really worry too much about your car doing things you'd rather it not do. FSD adds a whole new level of anxiety and complexity that is in no way a finished product. I can't imagine the FSD Beta being any better. I could understand it if it weren't so expensive, but at $12000/$200 per month, it is wildly overpriced. I've already canceled the subscription, and I doubt I'll be missing anything when it ends except the ability to impress friends by letting the car mope around a parking lot by itself.

("Tesla Autopilot Engaged in Model X.jpg" by Ian Maddox is licensed under CC BY 4.0.)

 

[OliverM3]

The law?

They can't remove things you paid for unless THEY own the thing they're removing it from.

At which point they can remove anything they want. Because they own the thing.

Which is exactly how this has always worked with hardware (see again a dealer swapping the wheels on a used car they took as a trade in- but they can't come do that for a private sale)- and now works the same way with software.

Not really that was a feature on your account with your car. It's not a feature on your sons account or car they can spin it anyway they like if you let them. I can't shop on their website without a car on my account. There are lots of things that they can and will do if no one says anything.
They could easily say it's a non-transferable item. That's the whole point I think that they shouldn't be removing a feature in any case whether they own the car or not. I'm still unsure why you like the removal of features and think it's a good thing that they do it?

 

[OliverM3]

Actually called my insurance on this and they said if it was purchased with car it Would be cover if totaled.

Mine on the other hand does not I ask when I purchased mine they cover the Model Type not software features.

 

[drtimhill]

I disabled the front headlight washers on my Audi the next person who buys the car may want them. The feature stays with the car and can be toggled by the buyer not Audi. My Prestige package included features that I paid for you can't just disable them when you trade in the car.

At least I think it unacceptable unless the customer specifically requests it. I think it's a slippery slope where software locks can be added and removed on items and people can be rebilled for an item previously purchased. What's to stop them from removing it when it's transferred to another account? So you give your son your used M3 and when he registers it on his account everything you've added is gone.

Which is not what happens .. as has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread (and others). You buy an option for the car, it STAYS WITH THE CAR. Just like any other car ever made anywhere. If you buy FSD you can sell the car with FSD, and get extra $$ for it depending on market demand. Again, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CAR EVER. I guess a regular car dealer could pull up one day and try to take the wheels off your car, but he doesnt because its against the law. And this is no different for options you buy from Tesla.

 

[OliverM3]

Which is not what happens .. as has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread (and others). You buy an option for the car, it STAYS WITH THE CAR. Just like any other car ever made anywhere. If you buy FSD you can sell the car with FSD, and get extra $$ for it depending on market demand. Again, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CAR EVER. I guess a regular car dealer could pull up one day and try to take the wheels off your car, but he doesnt because its against the law. And this is no different for options you buy from Tesla.

Isn't that exactly what I'm saying should continue to happen? I think it should stay with the car and tesla shouldn't be allowed to remove it. It would be fantastic if it were an account feature but right now it's neither it gets removed by Tesla when you trade in the car and it doesn't follow you to the next car.
So it's crappy either way.

 

[drtimhill]

Isn't that exactly what I'm saying should continue to happen? I think it should stay with the car and tesla shouldn't be allowed to remove it. It would be fantastic if it were an account feature but right now it's neither it gets removed by Tesla when you trade in the car and it doesn't follow you to the next car.
So it's crappy either way.

It DOES stay with the car, and you CAN sell the car with whatever features (hardware and software) you purchased. Siomple as that. It's up to you to find a buyer who will give you the best $$ for the car, based on the feature set and its desirability. If you choose to trade-in to Tesla, you are choosing a buyer (Tesla) who places no value on FSD,. But that is your choice, nothing is forcing you to sell to Tesla (and given the market at the moment you would be crazy to do so).

 

[OliverM3]

It DOES stay with the car, and you CAN sell the car with whatever features (hardware and software) you purchased. Siomple as that. It's up to you to find a buyer who will give you the best $$ for the car, based on the feature set and its desirability. If you choose to trade-in to Tesla, you are choosing a buyer (Tesla) who places no value on FSD,. But that is your choice, nothing is forcing you to sell to Tesla (and given the market at the moment you would be crazy to do so).

You don't get it do you my whole point is Tesla shouldn't be allowed to remove a previously paid for upgrade and recharge people.
I don't really care what you could do to circumvent this process. They shouldn't be allowed to do it in the first place.

 

[2101Guy]

It DOES stay with the car, and you CAN sell the car with whatever features (hardware and software) you purchased. Siomple as that. It's up to you to find a buyer who will give you the best $$ for the car, based on the feature set and its desirability. If you choose to trade-in to Tesla, you are choosing a buyer (Tesla) who places no value on FSD,. But that is your choice, nothing is forcing you to sell to Tesla (and given the market at the moment you would be crazy to do so).

 

[drtimhill]

You don't get it do you my whole point is Tesla shouldn't be allowed to remove a previously paid for upgrade and recharge people.
I don't really care what you could do to circumvent this process. They shouldn't be allowed to do it in the first place.

No, you are arguing that after Tesla purchase the car from you they should not be allowed to change the cars configuration before they resell it. Why? Can you name any other car in the world with this restriction? After they buy it, they own the car. It's up to them, the new owner, what they do with it, just as it is for any other car brand/dealer the world over. They may change the tires, remove a roof rack, etc etc, before they sell the car on. Why do you think a software feature is any different? Are you hung up on the idea that because its not a "physical" feature it should be in some magical way different? On what basis?

Let's say you upgrade your car with new tires. Tesla buys the car, removes the new tires and replaces them with standard OEM tires and resells the car like that. How is this any different from your FSD scenario? You seem to think that because its zero-cost for Tesla to do this with FSD, it is somehow unethical, but you have yet to provide any reason other than your emotional reaction. What if Tesla added FSD to a car they had re-purchased but did not have it previously. Is that wrong also?

And let's say they didn't do this feature-stripping, and kept the FSD feature in the car for resale. How would they price it? Why, they would add the same $$ premium they add (more or less) to a new car purchased with FSD. So where does that leave your argument? Basically, that you want Tesla to give you a better trade-in value so you dont have to sell the car yourself. That doesnt sound like a very valid argument to me.

 

[COS Blue]

They can't remove things you paid for unless THEY own the thing they're removing it from.

Apparently they do, though.

Source: Does Full Self-Driving (FSD) Transfer When You Sell a Tesla?

Tesla has been known to occasionally remove features like Free Unlimited Supercharging and Full Self-Driving when a Tesla changes hands through a third-party dealership sale. Because of this uncertain transfer history, some dealerships won’t include the value of Full Self-Driving in their trade-in or cash offers.

The main caution we’d like to make here is that even if the vehicle has changed hands and retained Full Self-Driving in the past, Tesla can remote audit and suddenly remove FSD from a car that has previously been owned by a dealership or sold in an auction.

Will Tesla do this all the time on every dealership sale? No. Reports of this happening suggest that it happens very rarely. But, to the best of our knowledge, buying a used Tesla that was owned by a dealership at any point may increase the probability that FSD/EAP features could be removed in the future (although it’s not a guarantee; see the section above on dealers).

Source: I'm a dealer and Tesla removed my car's FSD
(Perhaps this is "the famous case" you refer to -- car was advertised as having FSD, purchased, then FSD was removed)

Source: Tesla's Removal Of Features On Used Cars Appears To Be In Violation Of Its Own Rules

One Tesla owner who reached out, Brett, bought a 2018 Tesla Model X P100D from a Tesla dealership in March 2019. Because the car was a showroom vehicle and the previous year’s model, he got it at a bit of a discount, and the car was equipped with Ludicrous Mode (he confirms it was available as an option in the menu), which was further evidenced by the badging on the car, which featured an underlined P100D badge, which is normally used to indicate a car equipped with Ludicrous Mode from the factory.

Brett added FSD to the car for $5,000 extra, though there were issues with Tesla’s systems knowing he had paid for that option. In the process of confirming he had indeed paid for FSD, Tesla decided he didn’t really pay for Ludicrous Mode (which was originally a $20,000 option) and removed Ludicrous Mode from his car.

 

[Knightshade]

Apparently they do, though.

Not really though.

Source: Does Full Self-Driving (FSD) Transfer When You Sell a Tesla?

Some rando blog- that admits it's mostly guessing on anecdotes (and anecdotes which reflect what I've already said- sometimes they remove it while they own it, but the car doesn't phone home and discover that until after it has gone to auction where a dealer might buy it.

Source: I'm a dealer and Tesla removed my car's FSD
(Perhaps this is "the famous case" you refer to -- car was advertised as having FSD, purchased, then FSD was removed)

In this link they admit it was not "advertised" as having FSD, they just saw it on the screen in the car at auction and it was gone by the next day. So as I said, Tesla will remove it before it goes to auction on their back end- but the car doesn't always find out about that immediately.




Again this is crappy IT by Tesla, not some "we remove stuff after we already sold it" policy.

It's removed while they own it on the back end- which is where features are set from Teslas perspective.... though the car won't find out about this until next time it updates from the mothership.

Same thing happens in software licensing fairly often with things like revoked or unregistered keys- that happens on the server side, but until the client updates it doesn't know it happened.


Again Tesla can and should fix it, by forcing a push to the car the moment it's updated on the server-- and flagging the car as NOTFORSALE unless or until it gets positive confirmation back from the car it got the message.... but Teslas internal IT has long been pretty garbage and I haven't seen much sign of that improving.


Hanlon's razor applies here.

 

[Kognos]

No. It's still bound to the car.

But when you trade it in they own the car so they can now make changes to it.

Again, this is all solved by making FSD tied to the owner. The only reason this complaint exists is due to the idea/principle that because you're paying for FSD for THAT car, THAT car should always have it even beyond YOUR ownership. You're right in your claim, but the real double-dip here is that you have to pay for FSD again on a new car, not that Tesla does whatever they want to the old car. It's the needing to pay for FSD all over again for the new car that should be the only thing that matters.

 

[Knightshade]

Again, this is all solved by making FSD tied to the owner

Except you're trying to "solve" something there's no evidence is a "problem"

. You're right in your claim, but the real double-dip here is that you have to pay for FSD again on a new car

If I buy the sport package on a Lexus, I'll need to buy it again if I buy another Lexus later. Same same.

Even in software this is exactly how OEM software licensing has worked for decades.

When you buy an HP or Lenovo with an OEM copy of Windows, you pay for windows- but it's tied to that machine

You can't take it with you if you go build a different PC later.


If you are someone who changes cars super often then you have the subscription option instead.

 

[COS Blue]

In this link they admit it was not "advertised" as having FSD, they just saw it on the screen in the car at auction and it was gone by the next day. So as I said, Tesla will remove it before it goes to auction on their back end- but the car doesn't always find out about that immediately.

So during the inspection period, it has FSD on the screen. He makes a bid based on that. When he takes delivery, it's gone. And that's ok?

If I offer a car for sale, and I show it to a buyer and it has expensive rims on it, is it ok for me to then replace them with steel wheels before they take possession of the car, and then say "show me the paperwork that says it has nice rims"?

Some rando blog- that admits it's mostly guessing on anecdotes (and anecdotes which reflect what I've already said- sometimes they remove it while they own it, but the car doesn't phone home and discover that until after it has gone to auction where a dealer might buy it.

Ok, one of them maybe was a rando blog, but the Jalopnik story seems pretty legit, and cites several owners.

To each his own. You trust Tesla a lot more than I do.

 

[Knightshade]

Someone summarizes later in the thread (bold added)

"Long story short, he bought from Manheim, which as others pointed out is an auction house that dealers frequently buy from. There was paperwork (a report), but it did not say FSD was included. The assumption it was included came from it showing on the screen when looking at the car. Manheim for their part already denied the arbitration."




If it's not in the paperwork you didn't buy it.

 

[OliverM3]

No, you are arguing that after Tesla purchase the car from you they should not be allowed to change the cars configuration before they resell it. Why? Can you name any other car in the world with this restriction? After they buy it, they own the car. It's up to them, the new owner, what they do with it, just as it is for any other car brand/dealer the world over. They may change the tires, remove a roof rack, etc etc, before they sell the car on. Why do you think a software feature is any different? Are you hung up on the idea that because its not a "physical" feature it should be in some magical way different? On what basis?

Let's say you upgrade your car with new tires. Tesla buys the car, removes the new tires and replaces them with standard OEM tires and resells the car like that. How is this any different from your FSD scenario? You seem to think that because its zero-cost for Tesla to do this with FSD, it is somehow unethical, but you have yet to provide any reason other than your emotional reaction. What if Tesla added FSD to a car they had re-purchased but did not have it previously. Is that wrong also?

And let's say they didn't do this feature-stripping, and kept the FSD feature in the car for resale. How would they price it? Why, they would add the same $$ premium they add (more or less) to a new car purchased with FSD. So where does that leave your argument? Basically, that you want Tesla to give you a better trade-in value so you dont have to sell the car yourself. That doesnt sound like a very valid argument to me.

Its not right period. How about this example you pay tax when you buy a car. Well how about you having to pay tax as a seller for the income the sale of the car generated? Hey you made money right so you owe tax? Doesn't matter that you already paid the tax when buying it. It's the same thing someone bought a feature on a car. If they want a tied to car model that feature should be locked to the car. Not removable because they want more profit.
It's BS and you can defend them all you want. If I sell my computer right now. Guess what windows is licensed still for the new buyer it's hardware locked to the system. You buy apps for your phone guess what they have a follow the user model so I don't need to re-buy my apps when I upgrade my phone.
You have it one way or the other you shouldn't be able to benefit on both ends. And we're talking $12k not an app on a phone or a set of wheels.

 

[drtimhill]

If I sell my computer right now. Guess what windows is licensed still for the new buyer

That's right .. just like Tesla. End of discussion, glad we agree and you are happy with their business model.

 

[OliverM3]

That's right .. just like Tesla. End of discussion, glad we agree and you are happy with their business model.

I give up I don't like either model but the current one is bad because they don't follow it.

 

[COS Blue]

If I offer a car for sale, and I show it to a buyer and it has expensive rims on it, is it ok for me to then replace them with steel wheels before they take possession of the car, and then say "show me the paperwork that says it has nice rims"?

If it's not in the paperwork you didn't buy it.

Glad I'm not buying a car from you.

 

[Kognos]

Except you're trying to "solve" something there's no evidence is a "problem"

It's a problem for me. I don't have 12k to spend every time I want a new Tesla with FSD. Do you? Great. I think even the most elitist and rich amongst this crew would agree, however, that paying 12k for every new Tesla they might acquire is excessive and without a proposed alternative like I'm suggesting, they just do it. I think what I'm proposing is completely reasonable.

Even in software this is exactly how OEM software licensing has worked for decades.

As I've worked in the OEM industry, the whole and sole reason the license is tied to the machine is for supportability ONLY. It's "sold" to the vendor at a crazy discount so the vendor has to support it.

If the only copy of Windows that is sold at all, ever, was OEM I'd agree with you. I spend $ for the full retail license and I can carry that with me to my next machine. In fact, I can't think of a single modern piece of software, including my Windows that I have, that I can't take with me to my next machine. Why is Tesla's model like the old-school Dongle approach?

I pay $12,000 dollars for a license that I get zero supportability and all the liability where I literally can kill myself or others in its current incarnation, there had better be some enduring comfort in that decision. And my ask is that I want to carry it with me to my next Tesla. You can have a pretense that this is OEM-similar, but it's still a ridiculous comparison and concept. It's not an extraordinary ask, which leads me to your next comment:

If I buy the sport package on a Lexus, I'll need to buy it again if I buy another Lexus later. Same same.

Not at all even close to same. That's hardware. And even in some cases I could carry hardware from car to car. But that is a physical change to the object. It's like adding a bike rack. There are physical differences between those models. There is absolutely no physical difference at all between the Tesla Model 3 LR with FSD and without FSD. And like I've said in other threads, you even total your Tesla or damage the computer and run risk of never getting FSD replaced because gee, it's tied to the computer that's gone. It's not a transferrable license in its current state.

Seriously, the idea that software is tied to a machine is a ridiculous concept that has been horrendously out of style for as long as I can remember. I don't know how anyone defends that this is a good and proper thing. Tesla would make a LOT more money if they went per-user. And just like software licenses, only usable on one car at a time, even transferring via special process is also completely reasonable too.

I have no idea why people would even defend the licensing here in the first place -- I for one value Tesla but I feel that in 4-5 years they might be better with FSD, but I'll also get a new car by then. I'm a realist and have heard FSD is just around the corner for 5 years now as it is, but I'll bet they'll have a computer/vision/hardware upgrade between now and then; it's practically inevitable. I would totally pay $12k for a transferrable license and invest in the tech long term. It keeps owners brand-loyal.

 

[drtimhill]

As I've worked in the OEM industry, the whole and sole reason the license is tied to the machine is for supportability ONLY. It's "sold" to the vendor at a crazy discount so the vendor has to support it.

Oh no it isnt, certainly not for Windows, which is the example thrown out in this thread again and again. It's done that way so Microsoft get $$ for every new computer purchase, since they have known for years that most people only upgrade the OS when they buy a new computer. So in fact the Windows model is exactly the same as the Tesla model .. the only difference being in the case of Windows you more or less HAVE to buy the product when you buy the computer, whereas FSD is an option with Tesla.

Frankly I find all these arguments about software features being "different" in some mystical way from hardware features somewhat dubious. It seems to me that when people say things like "FSD should be transferrable because of... reasons" they are really saying "I want FSD to be transferrable so I save money". And I'm fine with someone arguing they want better value, we all do. But hiding behind faux-sophisticated logic about how it "should" be done seems disingenuous. At the end of the day, Tesla have made a business decision about how to sell FSD, and you are free to disagree with it, but arguing that it is somehow ethically or technically wrong isnt going to get you very far, or anyone else using the same curious logic on this thread.