Hacker News Reader

Comment by judge2020 | Hacker News Reader

judge2020

The difference seems to be that Tesla was 5-10 years ahead on everything: Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance, and of course they lead the way in making electric cars viable by showing that they can both look good and blast off in record time. But you're right that other automakers see Tesla as a threat and are catching up; for example, the range and charging curve improvements on models like the EV6 / Ioniq 5 look great, assuming the charger work [in the cold].

View on HN

> Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance

None of that is why Tesla was ahead of everyone for so long.

It's because their cars have better range, and Tesla is still the range leader. They held four of the top six spots in 2022, and the number one is the Lucid Air (only 3k of them have actually been sold):

https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/g32634624/ev-lo...

Also, I just want to say I am categorically not an Elon or Tesla fanboi and I am rooting for other brands to meet and exceed their range performance.

Is it really that simple? Is there something about Tesla’s technology that enables longer ranges? Surely they just put in bigger batteries and charge more for the car, and competitors could also do that if it was really a primary competitive advantage of Teslas.

Many of the competitors are STILL building on an ICE chassis and stuff batteries where the center axle would have been etc. When enough of them finally switch to pure EV platforms things will quickly improve I guess. But designing a new chassis that behave as well as their previous premium models, is not something they do in 1 year so it makes sense there is some delay..

The competitors also charge much less quickly, so there's some optimization there that they lack. Like, on paper they can do 250 kW but you never get more than 100 when actually charging it etc

And they basically all did develop EV platforms, probably the main reason it took them as long to catch up as it did. But now that they have them, the benefits coming from those platforms are just enormous.

Like, on paper they can do 250 kW but you never get more than 100 when actually charging it etc

Yeah this is one area where there's a lot of deceptive marketing. For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options).

Granted, that is still nice and fast, and the EV6 is a great car, but it's really frustrating how hard it is to compare charge speed from different manufacturers.

> For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options).

Wow that is the scummiest thing

How is this deceptive? Anyone who has ever charged a phone is probably familiar with the concept that a higher wattage charger provides faster charging speeds - electric cars are no different. Higher power chargers charge faster is not some secret.

The car simply states the fastest DC connection it supports - 350kw. It works with any charger up to this wattage, just like my laptop charges from any USB-C source up to 100w - was I missold my laptop too because if I use a 50w charger it only charges at 50w?

EVs must charge from a huge range of different wattage chargers - I regularly switch between 7kw, 11kw, 50kw and 250 depending on the spec of the power source.

The power you get is determined entirely by the DC plug you use (and to some degree state of charge, but lets not complicate this further...) - the car has no bearing on this beyond supporting up to 350kw in this example. The car can't magically make a 50kw charger output 350kw, as nice as this might be.

The specs say: [1]

DC Fast Charge Time (10-80% @ 350 kW via Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment) Level 3 Charger: Approx. 18 min.

and

Drive Battery Energy: 77.4 kWh

The battery is 77.4 kWh. This implies the battery is charging at 180kW.

If it were taking in the full 350kW and losing 170kW as heat that would be one (inefficient and dangerous) thing, but it doesn't sound like it actually draws 350kW?

For comparison, they say 73min for charging at 50kW, which implies the battery is charging at 45kW. If we figure that same 10% loss, then to charge at 180kW it's probably drawing 200kW from the charger.

[1] https://www.kia.com/us/en/ev6/specs

[2] 70% * 77.4 kWh * (60min / 1h) / 18 min = 181 kW

As battery charges its pretty common to taper the charge rate to improve health of the battery. To my knowledge, no EV today will sit at 350kw for the full 10 to 80 percent even if it can draw this. You still get faster charge times as the full draw can usually happen at close to empty, but charge rate will taper as battery fills. 181kw average is still pretty great - there are many EVs on sale that still max draw at 50 (looking at you VW...).

If the peak current draw were 350kW then I'd agree the specs were fine.

I'd thought they were advertising a 10% to 80% charge because that's the period over which they can charge at max speed? Looking now, it seems like they start tapering at 50%, and it's peak draw is 235kW? https://www.arenaev.com/kia_ev6_crowned_the_best_charging_ev...

(I agree this is very good, but it's still wrong to quote 350kW if they never draw this much.)

"Anyone who has ever charged a phone is probably familiar with the concept that a higher wattage"

I assure you that my mother has no idea what a watt is.

> For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW

> it's really frustrating how hard it is to compare charge speed from different manufacturers

Is the discrepancy just the inefficiency (i.e. waste heat) of the charging circuitry and/or battery chemistry? And if so, do different EV battery+charger systems have significantly different efficiencies?

I would have expected that the consumer-facing spec is always the power taken from the grid, that there is always some inefficiency (you can draw less energy from the batteries than came out of the grid), and that the level of efficiency would be roughly similar across all cars.

If that were the case, it wouldn't be much of a problem to compare charging rates across cars. But perhaps one or more of my expectations are wrong.

Oh, and EVs presumably vary wildly in their "fuel economy" (miles per kilowatt-hour or whatever unit EV folks use), so even a "fair" comparison of charging rate presumably wouldn't paint the entire picture.

Is the discrepancy just the inefficiency (i.e. waste heat) of the charging circuitry and/or battery chemistry?

I'm not positive on the specifics but I believe it has more to do with the combination of supported voltages/amperages offered by different chargers. i.e. a "350 kW capable" charger in practice means it can do 800V charging, which other chargers of lower kW ratings typically can't do, and the EV6 requires 800V to reach its max charge speed but can't actually handle a high enough amperage to get to 350 kW.

Like I said though, I might be confused on some of the details there, but I'm fairly positive it's not just waste heat...dissipating 110kW of waste heat would require some pretty insane cooling hardware.

This is indeed a good point. A more relevant measure of charging speed would be something like "miles per hour at EPA rated efficiency", though even that gets messy since most cars don't charge at a linear speed. And I haven't seen any car manufacturers use this metric other than Tesla, who like to brag about their supercharger stations exceeding 1,000 MPH of charging speed (though only the newest stations can just barely do that, for very short durations, and only on certain car models). "Time from 20%-80% charge" would also be a better metric, due to non-linear charging speed curves, but I haven't seen that one used much either.

> A more relevant measure of charging speed would be something like "miles per hour at EPA rated efficiency", though even that gets messy since most cars don't charge at a linear speed.

Pretty much the only time charging speed even matters is the "road trip" mode, where you are driving further than a single battery charge in one day and you want to stop as little as possible. In that mode, all I really want to know is what my duty cycle will be, e.g. "every 5 hours of driving you'll need to stop to charge for 30 minutes."

If I'm not in road trip mode, then as long as I can Level 2 charge overnight and/or all day at work, I would barely care what the peak charge rate is. It would still be nice to have something quick for the rare pickle (and of course road trips), but it doesn't seem like that big of a deal. I guess it's so prominent in marketing because range anxiety is still so deep in our mindset?

> The competitors also charge much less quickly

Counterintuitively, it can be cheaper timewise (and money-wise) to spec and build a new factory than to re-tool one that was custom-built to manufacture cars with a large set of core assumptions about power plant and drive train.

It's not just the platform. Another hindrance is baseline expectations: if Tesla designs the exterior strictly form-follows-cda, it's the "Tesla style". If an ICE maker does the same they break brands identity. Same for interior minimalism. Same for configuration options. They are used to selling a product that is basically solved (consider how cheap you can get e.g. a Dacia) and filled whatever capacity in terms of mass, cost and complexity with extra bells and whistles. That their customers now expect, ICE or not. Or that they suspect their customers to still expect, that's perfectly sufficient to never dare going a bit leaner. But for a BEV the manufacturer mostly sells a battery (in terms of mass, in terms of cost, in terms of quality) and the entire rest needs to be lean. Lean in cost, lean in complexity, lean in physical characteristics like mass and cda like it wasn't really all that necessary with the ICE.

A trivial example (in unnecessary complexity, physical properties not really involved): on the German website, when you pretend to be ordering an Audi A6 you get twelve different sets of wheels to choose from at five price points. And that's before you add winter wheels to the mix. And tire options, and different approaches to the pressure gauge problem and theft preventing bolts. The Tesla S offers a choice between baseline and expensive an optional winter wheel. Now this isn't an example that directly relates to range, but it's organisational cruft. They need to have boatloads of people employed only for solving various aspects of their solution to the made-up problem of not enough wheel choice (all the way from design to spare parts logistics..) and that robs focus. Those people might actually have better careers than their peers dealing with batteries and they do compete for intraorganizational attention. It's all rooted in customer expectations built over decades of inventing car problems to solve better than the competition, after the ICE was basically done. New, BEV-specific lines can help (apparently the e-tron gets by with only eight sets of wheels at two price points, yay!), but they are far from being as much of a fresh start as that blank slate as Tesla has been.

This is a huge dealbreaker for me tbh. Tesla's competitors are mostly still using an electrified ICE platform, showing even now they're years behind. It's comparable to countries who were pioneers in broadband internet and who are now lacking in progress and falling behind, or like MS Internet explorer that totally stagnated and held back browser technology.

Can competitors source the raw metals required in sufficient quantities to put bigger batteries in their cars?

Yes. And if Tesla would move to block them from doing so, they would set themselves up for an anti-competition suite of epic proportions in all markets, from the US over the EU all the way to China.

> if Tesla would move to block them from doing so

Tesla is in no position to do so. They have a strong position in battery assembly, but zero direct presence in extraction or refining.

The problem of procurement is about access to Lithium and Nickel ores. Telsa has a joint partnership with a Nickel mine in New Caledonia and rights on mining Lithium in Nevada. GM, Ford don't and there is a global shortage, so I don't see them succeeding in battery production long term. If they source batteries from Panasonic, they're buying an inferior battery. If they source from Tesla, that's obviously positive for Tesla.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56288781

If you hold a de-facto monopoly on certain taw materials, you are legally obliged to share it with competitors.

Plus: Tesla's battery cells came for a very long time from Panasonic. So much for inferior tech.

not quite, if you bought it in the open market its 10~20% more $ than having a fixed longterm contract. and ICE carmakers usually have one OEM like samsung and Panasonic who have interest in getting best price for each cell . Tesla has inhouse cell production capacity and uses cells from all oems to get the best possible price / cell . This will give tesla a permanent 5% lead (outside of china) in cell pricing.

Tesla's range advantage exists primarily in advertising. In real world tests it ranges from barely higher to moderately lower to equivalent competitors.

As batteries were even more expensive years ago, Elon put energy efficiency above everything else, like putting in lighter seats than ICE car manufacturers and optimizing the thermal system (octovalve).

The ,,false advertising'' that others say come from the fact that when you drive fast it doesn't matter how energy efficient you are, so it works out only with low speeds.

They also have by far the best charging network. IMO Teslas have the best long range driving experience. This detail is important although not the only thing to consider. However, it looms large in how Americans think about their cars.

I say this as someone who owns an electric car by a different manufacturer.

> They also have by far the best charging network.

In the US.

And the US drives these crazy valuations.

Of course, the US and China are the biggest global markets accounting for need and purchasing power. Europe has 400M more people than the US, but not the need for cars like the countries mentioned.

Supercharger network is also much better than the other networks in Europe as well in the current state.

Yeah, but there it doesn't matter. You can take your €15k Dacia Spring there and use the Tesla chargers :-)

It's true, but the cost is much higher. Normally I see folks using another vendor nearby in the same parking lot as as the Supercharger as they can get a better rate. In the future I think the other vendors will catch up unless some EV bubble bursts.

They also have by far the best charging network

This isn't a defensible position though for Tesla. New charging networks are coming online at a furious rate. I'm not sure maintaining their own network makes sense unless everything becomes compatible and they use it as an additional revenue stream. But for them to compete when every other auto manufacturer is subsidizing shared networks is risky.

A pretty easy choice when the other charges don't work on some of the busiest travel days in the US: https://youtu.be/S4e8GfBzqSk

I think it's range per $, and I think tesla just about started loosing there last year.

Does tesla have better range because they have better batteries, or just bigger batteries?

I always thought their valuation was more tied to the Chinese market which the CCP has made hostile to anything but electric going forward.

I don’t know if people have heard, but China is one of the bigger market. Heh.

You mean the range that a major governmental agency declared to be false advertising just a few days ago?

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/03/south-korea-fines-tesla-for-...

> South Korea’s antitrust regulator said it would impose a 2.85 billion won ($2.2 million) fine on Tesla for failing to tell its customers about the shorter driving range of its electric vehicles in low temperatures.

As a Tesla owner: range and ambient air temperature are significantly correlated (i.e., your 300 miles of range plummets to ~120 when below freezing).

But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims are correct.

I bet if Tesla were in Detroit instead of California, they'd remember that winter exists.

There's plenty of snowy winter weather within an hour or two drive of LA. I'm sure they test in the Angeles Mountains as much as every other car manufacturer I saw test up there when I lived in those mountains.

The place where Teslas form the largest fraction of the car population is Norway. They don't seem to have more problems with winter than any other car brand. I have driven my 2015 Mode S 70D at 1000 m altitude, -20°C, on numerous occasions with no problems at all.

My Model S is certainly better at handling the winter than a Nissan Leaf of the same vintage.

Most Norwegians in my experience are a lot happier wearing a woollen jumper or layers to cope with their weather, whereas many Americans are not happy unless their car is cranking to keep the interior at 72 while it's in single digits outside.

Heh, in my experience most Americans start complaining if the heat isn't cranked up to 80F in the dead of winter. But come summer, everybody wants the AC cranked down to 60F. T-shirts in the winter and stylish jackets in the summer, nobody dresses for the seasons.

Personally, I prefer an open window. Fresh air is almost always better than warm/cold stale air. But I think that'll kill a car's aerodynamics anyway, maybe worse for efficiency than running the heater/AC.

You can set your ac or heat to pull air in from outside. With the added benefit that most nice vehicles have an outside air filter to filter the fresh air first.

Hell, higher end vehicles will even auto-switch to recirc air based on outside air quality (particulate count). Surprised me the first time I saw it on my Jaguar.

My driving in the mountains in the winter was in shirtsleeves and bare feet. No trouble keeping the interior of the car warm. Also because it is electric I can sleep in it and be kept warm without the risk of being poisoned by exhaust fumes or kept awake by the noise. There was one occasion when I had to move my car to the other side of the car park because someone parked their ICE car next to mine and left it idling all night while they slept. As this was in an otherwise silent landscape it was pretty annoying.

And IIRC from a previous post, Tesla by far wins the "loses least range during shitcold temps".

Their new octovalve heat pump stuff makes a significant difference in cold weather. Anecdotally our Model Y (heat pump) is a bit more performant in the cold vs our 2018 Model 3 (not heat pump).

That's true with most batteries. It's foolish for car-markers to not include an air-temp variable when making range claims, I predict you will see all of them do that.

Battery longevity will also soon include depth-of-discharge and temp limits as well.

> But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims are correct.

Just like FSD works, vaguely, on a good clear day (not too sunny, though, in case you blind the vision sensors!) on good roads.

Totally ready "this year".

That article states > Although we haven't tested each of the longest-range models under our own EV highway range testing procedure, we've provided the data where possible.

I don't think Tesla is as far ahead on range as everyone thinks. Highway miles are what matters and Tesla tends to be optimistic on their numbers.

https://insideevs.com/reviews/443791/ev-range-test-results/

And isn’t that battery innovation and IP that Panasonic owns?

Tesla Long Range (573km) and Mercedes EQS (566km) are basically on par. Here's a good overview by independent testers: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1k1DOw-NwvW8E8tQeXlac...

It might be on par in range, but it's far behind in terms of efficiency... and also much more expensive to boot. Also, comparing it against the Model 3 (which, I know, is not even the same league of 'luxury' as the EQS) it's even further behind in range/efficiency.

The only cars that get the 'A' rating on that spreadsheet are the two Model 3 cars (316 mile version, and 200ish mile one), the 62kWh Nissan Leaf (216mi), and a bunch of super low range cars where efficiency is easy, since weight is way lower.

Competitors are catching up, yes, but they're still pretty far behind in the efficiency game... which means that Tesla can produce quite a few more cars for the same amount of raw battery pack. Which drives better margins and more production capacity.

Worth noting that list is each model's top trims. The Model 3 Long Range is currently unavailable for purchase.

I wish the EPA would clamp down on manufacturer's range estimates, as those ranges are theoretical (perfect driving with no real acceleration, no climate control, etc). We need practical city/highway range like we get for ICE cars. My EV6 is rated at 310, but driving as conservatively as possible in Houston I get more like 285. On a road trip where it was mostly exposed freeway and cruise control, my range was closer to 220.

Should also probably disclose range in freezing temps as well (I'm in Houston so I don't consider that as much as others). The first manufacturer to solve that problem well would possibly be a better car than one with a larger theoretical range.

they are the leader in claimed range not realize range.

Real world tests show something different:

"Every Tesla we've tested has failed to hit its EPA range estimate"

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...

I blame the EPA just because they've allowed two sets of EPA test suites to co-exist under the same marketing term.

> Minimalistic interiors

Is this something you see as a benefit? For me Tesla's overall aesthetic, including both their exterior looks and interior design, along with the absence of physical controls that go long with that represent their biggest downsides (outside of build quality).

The giant tablet screen that sticks out like a sore thumb is the opposite of minimalistic, or minimalistic in the worst way.

I wonder how long Tesla can get away with not offering CarPlay/Android Auto functionality. The lack of that basic, cheap, and frequently used feature disqualifies any car from consideration in my view.

I don’t love that I have to use the touch screen to open my glove box, and I certainly think there are a lot of UI issues (and the lack of integration with phones beyond regular bluetooth), but one thing I appreciate is that there aren’t any blinding dash lights. I can see a lot better at night in my Tesla as a consequence compared with any other vehicle I’ve driven.

I have not driven many cars, but I feel like there is usually a dial to adjust the brightness of dash lights. At least in Toyotas.

Hah, I had a Camry for 10 years and never knew it had such a dial!

You should read the instruction manual to the over $30k machinery you purchased. There's likely many features you didn't realize were there.

Joke’s on you. My Camry was only $25k new.

Congrats on being one of the 10,000, but given that my '81 VW Vanagon has adjustable dashlights, I'd not buy a modern car if it didn't have that feature. Rheostats aren't exactly cutting-edge technology (though I'm sure a modern car uses software to run the driver that sends commands down the CANBUS, which then...)

Relax. I didn’t say they don’t exist or that my Camry didn’t have it. I’m just saying I didn’t know it had it.

I have a dedicated glove box button in my Tesla S. It's one of the few dedicated buttons.

Most cars (all?) have the option to dim the dashboard backlight.

I find Saab's solution to be extremely elegant - on some, if not all models, there's a night mode button - what happens is that all non-essential instruments are simply dimmed to black (leaving only the speedo lit), until something happens which warrants your attention; the instrument in question will then come on.

Simultaneously, it dims all button backlights &c to just about off, so that you only get some assistance in locating the control you're after, not losing your night vision the moment you let your eyes stray from the road.

I had a Saab 93 estate (station wagon, for the benefit of non-UK residents) with this feature and loved it. I'd often use it and then also dial the brightness all the way down. Really helped to reduce visual fatigue when driving at night.

The Nissan Leaf lets you dim the dashboard lighting really far down. I’ve never had a problem with visibility at night.

People ooh and aah over the tacky gigantoscreen in Teslas, but it was really a hack to avoid having to design the usual litany of buttons and knobs that go onto a dash. Thankfully most other manufacturers haven't gone as totally screen-centric as Tesla (yet...)

Yup the "minimalism" in Teslas is just a hack to forego complex interior designs that they are holistically unable to reproduce in their "giga"factories. It helps to reduce complexity and weight if you just slap an iPad next to the steering wheel.

What's REALLY bad though is that other manufacturers rushed after Tesla and turned their brains off. Now we have a bunch of electric cars with crappy plastic interiors (light weight for range) and shitty tablets as user interface. Some are recognizing these horrifying mistakes that will cost lives but it will take years to recover because a lot of projects are too far ahead already to be changed or canceled.

I mainly speak from extensive experience with Volkswagen - the crappy capacitative touch buttons on the steering wheel will finally go. The new CEO Blume is not as blind as Herbert Diess - he doesn't view Tesla as the second coming of the iPhone, especially since Teslas continue to stagnate in quality and other manufacturers are quickly catching up.

Good luck outproducing Hyundai, Kia, Volkswagen, BMW, Audi... time was Teslas ally especially because Toyota kept insisting on Hydrogen cars for so long and VW fucked up software development so bad with CARIAD that Konrad Zuse is spinning in his grave ready to produce energy for all EVs sold.

I credit Tesla with 2 things:

- Opening the EV market and pushing other manufacturers to invest

- Great engineering regarding battery and range (in the past)

The list of issues is longer nowadays and I am not willing to forgive quite as much as in 2014 with great alternatives on the market.

Yeah it's ugly as shit. Their build quality didn't help any of that either.

Personally, I kind of like the Tesla exteriors with the exception of the nose of the 3.

The interiors though are pure trash. They look unfinished and designed by Rule of Cool, instead of practicality.

>> Minimalistic interiors

> Is this something you see as a benefit?

Yes. It's a distraction free operating environment. Tesla's aesthetic choices are semi-scandinavian/Ikea. Minimal doesn't have to be that style specifically. The early New Beetle did a passable job. The typical car is like MS Word with every ribbon open at once. A minimalist interior is focus mode.

The lack of tactile buttons increases distraction considerably.

I cannot activate most controls on a Tesla without taking my eyes off the road.

They also seemingly refuse to keep the GUI stable for more than three or four months at a time.

I agree. minimalistic design != "lack of tactile buttons"

Multi-touch capacitance with tuned solid state haptic feedback and fused OLED display technology with very thin tempered glass is a wonderful thing, especially considering how far it has gotten since 2007) but it has remained resounding and disappointingly flat.

While manufacturers are working with different display dimensions and gentle curves or even folds, I agree there is a need for topologically shaped glass to bring the tactile affordances of traditional buttons to software enhanced user interfaces. I'm not a display engineer but I suspect that different glass thicknesses result in poor visuals so we will have to wait for organic magneto-laser displays.

>Minimalistic interiors, modern infotainment, mobile app performance,

Which are all gimmicks.

The vast majority of people don't want that from a car. I've been in Telsas plenty of time and absolutely hate it. Yeah it looks cool for a moment, but I would never want that.

I for one absolutely love it. It doesn’t just look cool, it’s maximally functional for all of my use cases.

Yeah, I totally love having to take my eyes off the road in order to press any button in the cockpit. Truly brilliant design!

Why are you pressing buttons in the “cockpit” while you’re supposed to be driving? </s>

The “cockpit” button-obsession on HN is really cute sometimes. As if most drivers with button-filled “cockpits” actually feel around for them while still looking at the road.

Everything timing critical for driving is either fully automated or on the wheel in a Tesla, by the way.

I don't think the obsession is "on HN", I think the obsession is made by literally every other car manufacturer in the world.

Can you control the AC fully automatically or on the wheel in a Tesla?

Which features do you have to take your eyes off the road to activate?

Being ahead on everything doesn't help if the larger players can pick and choose improvements and learn from your mistakes and adapt.

It really doesn't help when the leadership of said car company is erratic and eroding the goodwill of the brand while people generally feel comfortable with more established carmakers. I feel pretty confident that major automakers are going to be around in 10 years. Buying a Tesla already feels like a bit of a gamble to me just because of its newness.

With an economy that's already slowing it could really hurt them when it's likely fewer people are buying cars and will be more cautious about it when they do. "Maybe I'll hold off another year and see how the new crop of cars compares with the Tesla."

I haven’t checked in a while, but last time I looked Tesla was supply constrained—they couldn’t make cars fast enough to meet demand, so (unless that has changed) they’re probably not too worried about hypothetical demand reduction.

Their global backlog of orders has gone from ~470k to ~74k over the last few months. There is no backlog of orders at all in the US or Canada and the backlog for the rest of the world is dropping quickly.

https://twitter.com/TroyTeslike/status/1609346097733828609?s... (This is the most recent data made public, the Patreon data goes through Dec 31 with the numbers quoted)

Just to add, I used the 'build a tesla' recently for Model Y and was quoted delivery time of about 30 days. Not sure if that's accurate, but doesn't sound too supply constrained compared to discussions with other automakers I've spoken to recently (6-12 months out in some cases). I backed out because I'm really concerned with build quality issues that seem to be worsening, and generally losing confidence daily this company will be around in 5 years.

I don't think this is true anymore, since they recently started rolling out discounts on vehicles, which is usually a sign of overstock / slowing demand [0]

[0] https://www.torquenews.com/14335/tesla-sweetens-deal-discoun...

> in making electric cars viable by showing that they can both look good and blast off in record time

I still don't get the 'look good' part, why do non-ICE cars always need to have a different look that what is already popular/proven in the market. The traditional automakers are still doing this today with their first big pushes in EV. If they don't sell they'll blame 'the market' for not wanting EV, but in reality it could be folks just aren't interested in the design / don't what to make the fashion statement.

Almost as if ICE car companies don’t want electric to sell. BMW was the worst of the lot. They’re doing better now.

I don't think that makes them conspiring or evil. Just pragmatic.

"We have tens of billions and tens of decades invested in 'perfecting' ICE. This is a huge upheaval" is an attitude I'd expect any of them to take (while still recognizing they need to see where the market is heading and planning for that).

And also, I get that it's subjective, but the Model Y does not look anything resembling "good" to me. It's like a weird futuristic Aztek. It's not attractive.

They were 10 years ahead, 5 years ago. The market has realized that.

It's also starting to creep into the mainstream consciousness that EVs aren't a good long-term solution to our poor transportation system.

The answers to our woes are joint transportation and housing infrastructure. However those are anathema to the American character. I don't see it happening.

Most car buyers don't actually want minimalistic interiors.

Some people like black overstuffed couches. Some people like Danish modern.

Last time I went car shopping, I saw a digital speedometer which irritated me for some reason so I rejected that model from further consideration.

I take it you're not shopping for new cars then? the cheapest new car I'm aware of that has analog gauges is a porsche.

btw I have the same preference, just letting you know you are in for a disappointment.

You just haven't looked cheap enough. For example, the Fiat Panda [1] the Nissan leaf [2] and the Kymco VSR-125 [3] all have analog speedometers.

[1] https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/fiat/panda [2] https://www.parkers.co.uk/nissan/leaf/review/interior/ [3] https://www.kymco.co.uk/scooters-and-motorcycles-range/125cc...

Seems to be a market difference? Of the three cheapest cars I could think of in my local market (Honda Civic, Kia Picanto, and Nissan Micra), only the Honda Civic has a digital speedometer.

Of course some do. The point is the vast majority do NOT want the interior of a Tesla.

They want everything in the same darn place that 99% of cars have it, with physical switches to be able to change things so you can just feel what you are doing without taking your eyes off the road.

Most people see the interior of a Tesla as a complete gimmick.

I trust HN's opinion on many things, but definitely not on their opinion of what the vast majority of people think is fashionable. HN is solidly "overstuffed black leather couch" in their fashion sense.

I would say the other way round. Hacker News feels like a Danish modern crowd. Personally I am all for minimalism but Teslas are plain ugly.

I consider myself to be minimalist/modern in my choices, and in my opinion the Tesla is a garbage nightmare that took all of the complexity away from physical buttons and just shoved into a hard to navigate touchscreen menu with poor visual placement. I guess that makes me an overstuffed black leather couch type in your opinion.

I think a lot of car manufacturers have gone the path of no physical switches and it's becoming irritating. You shouldn't have to navigate screens to adjust your hvac while driving.

VW admitted it was a mistake and will go back to physical buttons with next gen of their models.

This move gives me hope that by the time an EV is practical in my corner of the world it'll be less annoying, too : )

their sales indicate otherwise

No they don't. We have the small rich population that want a new fancy toy. I've seen it with everyone I know that has a Telsa. "Oh look how geeky I am, this is so neat I have a big screen!".

That is the insane minority.

I know you’re coming back in a few minutes to cite your sources. Excited to see the results of this survey!

I know it's personal preference but I think a good number of people don't know they will be fine without 15 buttons on the steering wheel or 10 different buttons for climate control. I haven't missed any of that moving to a Model 3.

Most of them would rather have buttons on their doors to control the things that have been controlled that way for generations, though. You shouldn't have to hunt through a menu to lock a door.

Why do you have to manually lock a car door? I’ve never pressed the lock/unlock icon on the screen in 4 years of driving my Model 3.

But by the way, you don’t have to hunt thru a menu for it, the lock status icon is pressable and it’s always on the home screen.

Lock and unlock is like start and stop buttons. Almost totally extraneous and easily inferred 99% of the time.

> Why do you have to manually lock a car door? I’ve never pressed the lock/unlock icon on the screen in 4 years of driving my Model 3.

Conveniently accessible manual door lock/unlock mechanisms become non-negotiable the moment your software-based power-dependent interface becomes inoperable, especially if that's during some emergent crisis like say a giant lithium battery letting the smoke out.

This isn't just some hypothetical:

https://stealthoptional.com/news/tesla-driver-trapped-in-bur...

An emergency is a valid concern and I believe all cars, regardless of Tesla, that feature electronic (fancy) doors also feature physical escape latches. In the Model 3 you can pull up on a handle on the door to force the door open without the power required to first roll down the window to clear the weather seal this will also unlock the door as well.

From your own linked article:

> Juhta criticized the emergency protocol for Tesla’s electric cars, saying that it isn’t intuitive enough.

Which is kinda ironic to me considering anytime a new rider is in my car I make sure to tell them about pressing the small button to open the door because they seem to find that escape latch on their own and often think it's just a regular open door latch.

> Which is kinda ironic to me considering anytime a new rider is in my car I make sure to tell them about pressing the small button to open the door because they seem to find that escape latch on their own and often think it's just a regular open door latch.

Is it the same in the Model Y from the article as your Model 3?

It is, but the manual latch isn't on the door at all in the back seat, so passengers are unlikely to mix it up there.

> The difference seems to be that Tesla was 5-10 years ahead on everything...

This is pretty much the definition of a great tech product: it's ahead of anything else by N years. What makes a great technology company is that they manage to consistently maintain that lead with product after product.

We'll see if Tesla can maintain its lead. It's not looking good and it probably depends mostly on whether or not Elon Musk can regain his grip on reality.

Tesla has already lost its lead as far as the car itself. The Ioniq is an affordable car and better than Tesla Model 3/Y. Mercedes and BMW have better luxury models with EQS and i7, and the BMW i4 is more fun to drive than a Model 3. The Cadillac Lyriq costs what a Model Y does but compares favorably to the Model X. Tesla interiors feel cheap compared to other cars in their same class and they have notorious build quality issues.

They do have one major advantage, which is why I still drive a Model S, and that's the Supercharger network. It's a big deal for anyone who regularly drives a few hundred miles in their EV.

The infotainment system on Teslas is worse than a Nissan Sentra with CarPlay/Android Auto

If it would just integrate with airplay (and whatever the Android equivalent is) then Tesla wouldn’t need to support a one-off application for every streaming service.

You don't need a one-off application for every streaming service, those are there in case you want to use them without phone at all. Bluetooth audio is a thing, and you can stream whatever audio you want from your phone to your car audio using that.

Bluetooth audio is a poor substitute for a full UI.

> You don't need a one-off application for every streaming service, those are there in case you want to use them without phone at all

I agree. That's why it doesn't make sense that Tesla is approaching it as "bespoke or bust".

> Bluetooth audio is a thing, and you can stream whatever audio you want from your phone to your car audio using that.

Yes, but "streaming a single audio track (with low audio quality)" is pretty much all BlueTooth is fit for, and the problem is much larger than that--a luxury car should be able to stream higher quality audio and it should also be able to stream video (e.g., HBO, Paramount Plus, etc). Moreover, it should facilitate a media browsing experience through the touch screen. First of all, it's limited to audio--it doesn't help me stream HBO or Paramount or any other video service.

It’s illegal in most states to stream video on a console that the driver can see while they are driving.

Apple and I believe Google are very strict about which apps can be used for CarPlay/Android Auto. There would be major repercussions if they weren’t.

Of course. I’m not arguing for video while driving.

> First of all, it's limited to audio--it doesn't help me stream HBO or Paramount or any other video service.

Tesla has apps for a bunch of video streaming services. And for those it doesn't have, you can just use the built-in web browser. It works just fine (assuming you are in a parked mode, they won't work while you are driving for obvious safety reasons).

The built-in web browser is extremely slow and tedious to use (at least in my 2022 Model Y), but yes, it technically works.

Tesla's only competition is Chinese EV makers, everyone else can't make enough cars, and none of them are profitable.

Tesla are 5-10 years ahead on profit, due to adopting cost savings such as no buttons, more miles per kwh, thus smaller batteries, casting most of the body in 2 or 3 pieces.

And then there's in house software creation, vs everyone else. Software makes their use of their motors more efficient.

That's before you have the problem with how to get rid of your non EV business.

Then you have battery tech, opening lithium refining facilities, owning more of the supply chain. Everyone else will be paying extra for batteries for decades.

> And then there's in house software creation, vs everyone else. Software makes their use of their motors more efficient.

You think automakers don't know about software? You do realize that what the ECU has to do to keep internal combustion engines running as efficiently as they do today is at least an order of magnitude more complex that electric motor management

> That's before you have the problem with how to get rid of your non EV business.

That's an asset, not a liability. Some places in the world are unlikely to have the infrastructure to support a conversion to EVs in the next decade or two. It doesn't mean we stop trying but having mature technology that you don't need to invest a lot in to support a niche use case is a good thing, not a bad thing.

> Then you have battery tech, opening lithium refining facilities, owning more of the supply chain. Everyone else will be paying extra for batteries for decades.

There's no reason to believe that Tesla's suppliers will remain exclusively theirs unless they've signed massive longterm deals that the public is unaware of.

You can listen to what the CEO's of the 'big 3' are saying. Tesla has vertically integrated. The big 3 spent the past 50 years doing the opposite. They use many of the same ODM/OEMs for things with small twists here and there. The companies that make those things for that supply chain are behind tesla. For creating a new market like tesla is in you probably want vertical integration again to iterate on it. It was one of the 2 key innovations Ford had early on (as they were not the first car company). But as years went on it made less sense to do that. Now it is making sense again to do it.

> You think automakers don't know about software?

Judging from my experience with cars' integrated sat-nav, speech recognition and bluetooth hands-free I would say most automakers do not consider good software to be a priority.

Yes, automakers outsourced all their software, someone else made the ECUs.

https://www.teslarati.com/volkswagen-herbert-diess-third-par...

Tesla will be Tesla's supplier https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-19/tesla-con...

It sounds like you're saying that Tesla has no competition if you ignore their competition. You can't be dismissive of Chinese EV makers, who are rapidly encroaching on western markets and are reshaping the motor industry. Here in Norway I'm noticing more and more Chinese EVs on the road and they are competing at all levels of the market, from "affordable" to high end. To add to those numbers, many originally Western marquees now have full or partial Chinese ownership.

Many Chinese companies are multifaceted or have co-ownership with suppliers. For example, look at a company like BYD, which appears to be out producing Tesla and has yet to fully enter many markets. They also build their own batteries. The Chinese motor industry is a formidable competitor.

Indeed, that's Tesla's only competition, BYD's numbers include hybrids though, and ASP is much lower.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com