Want to return new Tesla

[bonnie]

For what it's worth (and not the point of this thread, but it's already been hijacked) - I doubt Tesla's motivation for disabling Autosteer has anything to do with 'punishing' the driver. There are other reasons to choose from - not validated above 85, NHSTA requirement, whatever - yet We (the royal forum 'We') insist on choosing the most ominous.

I believe that limit will get removed with time and I look forward to it (yes, I've experienced the limit first hand, it was not debilitating or a tragedy - just annoying enough that I remember not to do it again). For now, We live with it.

 

[calisnow]

Hi Guys

hoping for some advice here.

I just took delivery of my new Tesla S 75 about 2 weeks ago and I'm really unhappy with it.

I won't go into the details as to what I'm unhappy about, but i want to return it to Tesla. It has 200 miles on it.

I've already been in touch with Tesla and they've offered to try and fix the problems which i know they won't be able to because they are part of the programming and they've also given me the whole bog standard we won't take it back line.

My question is, what do i do? I don't want to sell it privately because i will lose thousands and thousands of dollars including the $4000 in sales tax i already paid when i took delivery of it.

Any advice would be appreciated.

thanks

lol awesome post!

 

[R.S]

At what speed do you outrun the radar's ability to analyze a threat then apply AEB effectively around a gentle corner or rise or with another car blocking the view? Is it in the owner's manual? Or is it something you learn by accident?

Best I can tell, the effective range of modern ACC radar is about 120m. It can 'see' further but not all the time. Only somebody who is not concerned for their safety would consider 120m at 160kmh plenty of room for all driving situations.

I don't know what the effective range is, but back in 2005 a Mercedes could detect cars within 150m with radar. Which is about the distance needed to get from 160 km/h to 0, which is a possible, but rather unlikely event. Then of course there are also cameras.

But if the radar and camera aren't enough at 100mph, I think I'll have to buy a LIDAR sensor car, next.

 

[Carl]

Well, if they want to sell it in Europe, they better increase it to 85 as well.

And to be successful in Germany, EAP needs to work at speeds up to 100mph, better even beyond. My AP1 can do 90 mph and that's fine for what it should do. Still annoying in some instances and far from what other systems can do, even the Golf can have TACC activated up to 100 mph. But 75 is way too low for a feature I mostly use on highways (Autobahn in Germany and Austria mostly, so speed limits between 90 mph and light speed).

As we all know, 'ludicrous' is actually faster than light speed, according to Mel Brooks and Elon Musk, but I wouldn't trust AP at such speeds. 150 km/h max, as it is today, seems reasonable (and incidentally, when road-tripping, driving faster than 150 km/h will not help - you'll be charging more additional minutes than those which you saved by driving 150 km/h rather than 140km/h or so).

I also tried once on an empty Autobahn what speed my MS could reach, but never ever would I trust any current version of AP to drive at that speed!

On the opposite side of the spectrum: I am quite sure FSD will simply keep to the speed limits. I cannot imagine you could program FSD to, as a general rule, do "+5 miles/h over speed limit", or so. You could probably take over and do it yourself, in case you wanted to race against an incoming tsunami or some similar circumstance, but I can't imagine a self-driving Tesla allowing its 'passengers' to overrule any speed limits.

 

[R.S]

As we all know, 'ludicrous' is actually faster than light speed, according to Mel Brooks and Elon Musk, but I wouldn't trust AP at such speeds. 150 km/h max, as it is today, seems reasonable (and incidentally, when road-tripping, driving faster than 150 km/h will not help - you'll be charging more additional minutes than those which you saved by driving 150 km/h rather than 140km/h or so).

I also tried once on an empty Autobahn what speed my MS could reach, but never ever would I trust any current version of AP to drive at that speed!

On the opposite side of the spectrum: I am quite sure FSD will simply keep to the speed limits. I cannot imagine you could program FSD to, as a general rule, do "+5 miles/h over speed limit", or so. You could probably take over and do it yourself, in case you wanted to race against an incoming tsunami or some similar circumstance, but I can't imagine a self-driving Tesla allowing its 'passengers' to overrule any speed limits.

Yea 150 km/h is kind of ok, or at least I can accept it. It would be nice to have TACC at higher speeds, too, but I can live with it. And I've never seen my AP1 as more than steering assist, blind spot monitoring and TACC anyways, so it's fine. But my next Tesla will have EAP and I'm not sure if 150 km/h is enough for autonomous on ramp to off ramp diving. But it could definitely work 99% of the time and if that 1% might be the price you pay for no speed limit on a 2 lane part of the Autobahn, I'll pay it.

My original post though was to the "they should limit AP to 75mph" comment and that will make EAP totally unusable for me and definitely not worth 5k.

 

[bcsteeve]

I doubt Tesla's motivation for disabling Autosteer has anything to do with 'punishing' the driver. There are other reasons to choose from - not validated above 85, NHSTA requirement, whatever

Nah, it is punishment "not validated above 85"? OK, sure... but then just shut it off while above the limit. Easy. Consider what happens when you try to engage AP when the little AP icon isn't there... it bitches at you and puts up a message saying you can't do that. Then, when you can do that, it will happily engage.

There's really no reasonable explanation that I can think of for disabling a system until one stops/starts that doesn't also REQUIRE said stop/start. For example, if the car detects some problem with the car then it makes sense to put the car into limp mode and force you to stop the car and evaluate the situation. That makes sense. But can you imagine if you tried turning the radio up to 12? And they made you shut off the radio until you wrote a letter of apology? That's basically what's happening here. Unless there's some problem detected with the AP system, it is fully sufficient to not allow the system to engage outside of predetermine parameters. No need to disable it until reset. If engaging it above 85 somehow breaks the thing, then we have bigger problems with quality.

As far as NHSTA goes, you misunderstand their role. They do not engage in feature development. We already know there are other cars that can operate above 85mph with steering assist. They don't make rules specific to a manufacturer.

 

[bonnie]

Nah, it is punishment "not validated above 85"? OK, sure... but then just shut it off while above the limit. Easy. Consider what happens when you try to engage AP when the little AP icon isn't there... it bitches at you and puts up a message saying you can't do that. Then, when you can do that, it will happily engage.

There's really no reasonable explanation that I can think of for disabling a system until one stops/starts that doesn't also REQUIRE said stop/start. For example, if the car detects some problem with the car then it makes sense to put the car into limp mode and force you to stop the car and evaluate the situation. That makes sense. But can you imagine if you tried turning the radio up to 12? And they made you shut off the radio until you wrote a letter of apology? That's basically what's happening here. Unless there's some problem detected with the AP system, it is fully sufficient to not allow the system to engage outside of predetermine parameters. No need to disable it until reset. If engaging it above 85 somehow breaks the thing, then we have bigger problems with quality.

We've got plenty of threads hashing this out. I think we can agree that what the OP is experiencing is within the behavior outlined in the user manual.

 

[bcsteeve]

I think we can agree that what the OP is experiencing is within the behavior outlined in the user manual.

Certainly.

 

[DarkMatter]

To go back to the start of the thread: there are exactly two ways to return this car. Either return it for trade value, and take your lumps on the (probably) $25k hit you'll take by doing that, or convince Tesla to do it out of goodwill. That's it. There are no other ways available. (okay, there's one more - do you have GAP insurance and a nearby lake along with a questionable sense of ethics?)

I'm sorry that you do not like these details about the car. Hopefully you can afford to take the hit or learn to live with these deficiencies. Meanwhile we'll do all we can to help you work out how to do it, with perhaps a bit of snark.

 

[stan23]

If i'm reading between the lines correctly - and I think I am. It seems the major complaint from the OP is that he felt like he was oversold on the capabilities of AP. All the other points were just put on there to build up a case of dissatisfaction.

I'm in no way saying the OP doesn't have a valid complaint. I would be pretty pissed too if I was sold on certain functions and features only to find it completely inoperable at the moment. But once a person feels 'taken' then the item in question has become a 'do not want'

 

[Doug_G]

For what it's worth (and not the point of this thread, but it's already been hijacked) - I doubt Tesla's motivation for disabling Autosteer has anything to do with 'punishing' the driver. There are other reasons to choose from - not validated above 85, NHSTA requirement, whatever - yet We (the royal forum 'We') insist on choosing the most ominous.

Deactivating autosteer if you go over 85 mph is reasonable. Disabling it permanently until you power down the car is "punishment". IMHO that's completely unnecessary.

 

[futurem3owner]

I'm just hypothesizing here but if you're going over 85 mph and that deactivated the autopilot, Tesla is thinking that you would want to speed above 85 mph again. Having autopilot continually being deactivated and manually activated again, Tesla is probably fearing that this might lead one to forget and think that autopilot is still active at speeds above 85 mph and therefore, Tesla wants to avoid completely avoid that issue.

 

[bonnie]

Deactivating autosteer if you go over 85 mph is reasonable. Disabling it permanently until you power down the car is "punishment". IMHO that's completely unnecessary.

We almost had this thread back on track.

 

[Electroman]

Deactivating autosteer if you go over 85 mph is reasonable. Disabling it permanently until you power down the car is "punishment". IMHO that's completely unnecessary.

Okay how about when you don't keep hands on the wheel after repeated beeps, AP is disabled. is that acceptable? or is that also an unnecessary punishment?

 

[Doug_G]

Okay how about when you don't keep hands on the wheel after repeated beeps, AP is disabled. is that acceptable? or is that also an unnecessary punishment?

I think that is more reasonable. However, there is no guarantee that I am paying attention, and the method it uses to detect my hands is dumb. Whenever I get warnings my hands are already on the wheel. So I consider it ineffective.

 

[SMAlset]

This doesn't have anything to do with the Model S 75 being discontinued like 2 weeks after getting it does it? Also wondering if you test drove the car before buying it. I know it's tough to know how you'll feel about driving a car until you've had it a while and we had bought a Toyota Camry as a second car to use to drive to work and I absolutely hated riding in it from the moment we drove it on a long trip after picking it up. There were more than a few things about it I really disliked. And honestly we would have loved to have done a do over. We ended up keeping it for 8 years and traded it in for our MS. We have a 75D and honestly we both feel it's the best car we've ever had and we both love how it handles and love driving it.

Someone once mentioned that the best thing to do when looking at buying a new car is to rent one for a month. I honestly don't think the issues mentioned are lemon law issues. With cars becoming more computerized, there is bound to be ways the manufacturer did things that don't fit one's style of driving. Sometimes you adapt over time and other times you hold on to the car until it makes sense to not.

 

[ucmndd]

I totally admit to buying a car on impulse before... ended up hating it, took a bath selling it two months later.

What you describe... wanting to return the car like a pair of jeans that didn't quite fit right, is just not the reality we live in. Sorry you're disappointed, but in 11 pages of this thread I've gathered that you basically want Tesla to take the car back because it possibly has a malfunctioning speaker.

 

[Electroman]

..and.. and.. get this: Slacker is not playing the song he requested.

 

[ls7corvete]

Chiming in...I am there now, got an SUV on an impulse. Horrible buying experience. Cant wait for my Model 3 and for Tesla to put those stealerships out of business.

Anyways, after calming down for a few months I realize I havent lost that much money.

Just saying, we have all been there.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Okay how about when you don't keep hands on the wheel after repeated beeps, AP is disabled. is that acceptable? or is that also an unnecessary punishment?

I for one think that one is completely reasonable. Ignoring the way your attention to the road is measured (holding the steering wheel) is a reasonable scenario for AP to consider the driver non-compliant with the system's limitations during automated driving. If you don't comply with the need to pay attention, that is a reasonable end-result. Plus it gives you several warnings! (On the contrary, the 90 mph limit is just boom, killed.)

Disabling the system entirely (until you park) due to manual exceeding the speed limitation of 90 mph on the system, on the other hand, has no such explanation. The user by definition is in control of that situation. It is a case of the user taking manual control of the system, which AP should IMO simply respect by disengaging as needed and resuming once conditions allow and the driver requests it again.

The current way indirectly encourages drivers not to exceed 90 mph or to stop afterwards if they do. Both of these are scenarios that AP, given its current limitations, has no way of understanding itself. AP does not understand why 90 mph was exceeded or might be necessary (maybe it was to escape a life-threatening event), nor does it know what kind of stop and go its disabling is encouraging in the user at the given time (dark road, bad weather, dangerous etc.?)... it does not, in fact, even understand if exceeding 90 mph might be legal in the scenario. It is blindly enforcing a rule that has no logical reason to it, hence people dislike it.

Of course one can say it is up to the user to comply with the limits, but this 90 mph kill-switch makes no sense and potentially encourages behavior that is dangerous. And before anyone says people just need to obey the speed limits, would you be OK with AP2 being kill-switched every time you exceed the actual speed limit and not just 90 mph? Probably not.