Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

edmunds.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 111 posts

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#31

Post by wlesieutre »

sunstone wrote: post #23
tinbad wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“you need brakes” According to the latest Consumer Reports test the model 3 failed pretty hard in that department: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/05/pump-brakes-consume...

That was one vehicle. The first test was fine. Subsequent tests were not. It's pretty clearly a flaw in the brakes of that particular vehicle. If CR wants to generalize from that fine, but it's not doing a service to its readers.

It says they borrowed a second car from a private owner to double check and had the same results.

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#32

Post by morogop »

sunstone wrote: post #23
tinbad wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“you need brakes” According to the latest Consumer Reports test the model 3 failed pretty hard in that department: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/05/pump-brakes-consume...

That was one vehicle. The first test was fine. Subsequent tests were not. It's pretty clearly a flaw in the brakes of that particular vehicle. If CR wants to generalize from that fine, but it's not doing a service to its readers.

CR obtained additional vehicles.

But I get it. You're a volunteer in Elon's disinformation army. And you're such a dumb cuck that you don't even get paid for bullshitting the public.

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#33

Post by gomox »

userbinator wrote: post #26
rwbt wrote: post #3

A lot of annoyances, needless complicated door handles, buggy software. But this made me smile and the car enthusiast inside me is ecstatic. > "This car is a joy to drive on Angeles Crest Highway, and I don't say that lightly. Angeles Crest is a famously demanding road that winds up into the San Gabriel Mountains north of Los Angeles. You need brakes, power and a taut, balanced chassis to do it right. The Model 3 has…

It's a new kind of fun to lift off the throttle ahead of a corner and realize you've already scrubbed enough speed without even touching the pedal. That sounds similar to the feeling of driving a bus or other heavy vehicle with a retarder and/or Jake brake.

Sounds like driving a manual, actually. You just use the brakes a lot less.

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#34

Post by hooloovoo_zoo »

sunstone wrote: post #23
tinbad wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“you need brakes” According to the latest Consumer Reports test the model 3 failed pretty hard in that department: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/05/pump-brakes-consume...

That was one vehicle. The first test was fine. Subsequent tests were not. It's pretty clearly a flaw in the brakes of that particular vehicle. If CR wants to generalize from that fine, but it's not doing a service to its readers.

They tested on 2 model 3s with "almost identical" results. https://www.consumerreports.org/hybrids-evs/tesla-model-3-re...

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#35

Post by flyGuyOnTheSly »

userbinator wrote: post #24
flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #14

>The passenger vanity mirror fell off completely. Installed and held on only by double-sided tape. That is the most worrying report of all... taping together parts of a $56,000 automobile? Glass parts, no less? Sounds like desperation is taking hold at Tesla imho...

What did you expect? Tape is not uncommon. Pretty much all mirrors are held on with double-sided tape, or some other soft adhesive.

>What did you expect?

Some actual engineering of a snap together framework at the very least? (Which would be even cheaper than just taping it together in the long run...)

Some nuts and bolts, perhaps?

I have never heard of a mirror "falling off" of any consumer car unless it was in some kind of accident... especially not after a few months of ownership... of a $56,000 car...

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#36

Post by justin66 »

sunstone wrote: post #23
tinbad wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“you need brakes” According to the latest Consumer Reports test the model 3 failed pretty hard in that department: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2018/05/pump-brakes-consume...

That was one vehicle. The first test was fine. Subsequent tests were not. It's pretty clearly a flaw in the brakes of that particular vehicle. If CR wants to generalize from that fine, but it's not doing a service to its readers.

> That was one vehicle.

From the Consumer Reports article[1]:

Because we saw some inconsistency in the braking performance, we got a second Model 3 (a privately owned vehicle that was loaned to CR) to verify our results. CR has tested second samples in previous situations to double-check our findings.

...

CR’s experience with the Model 3’s braking is not unique. Car and Driver, in its published test of a Model 3, said it noticed “a bizarre amount of variation” in its test, including one stop from 70 mph that took “an interminable 196 feet.”

“I’ve been testing cars for 11 years,” Car and Driver Testing Director K.C. Colwell said in an interview with CR, “and in 11 years, no car has stood out with inconsistent braking like this. Some trucks have. . . . It was just weird.”

[1]https://www.consumerreports.org/hybrids-evs/tesla-model-3-re...

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#37

Post by greglindahl »

jjeaff wrote: post #27
MBCook wrote: post #4

I can’t wait to see the apologists on this one. The Model 3 seems more like an alpha/prototype than a real car for consumers. As soon as I saw the interior I knew it wasn’t going to go well, seems it’s worse than I thought. Add in the software issues and other bugs they seem to be in countering in this is a pathetic experience for a $60,000 car + years of waiting.

I had to look that price up, because I could have sworn the big talking points was the $35k price tag. And sure enough, average purchase estimates are swelling past $50k average and some paying closer to $60k.

Tesla should absolutely be condemned for offering options, like every other carmaker.

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#38

Post by justin66 »

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #35
userbinator wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did you expect? Tape is not uncommon. Pretty much all mirrors are held on with double-sided tape, or some other soft adhesive.

>What did you expect? Some actual engineering of a snap together framework at the very least? (Which would be even cheaper than just taping it together in the long run...) Some nuts and bolts, perhaps? I have never heard of a mirror "falling off" of any consumer car unless it was in some kind of accident... especially not after a few months of ownership... of a $56,000 car...

It's a vanity mirror. It shouldn't ever fall off or come loose, but the correct double-sided adhesive should be perfectly adequate.

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#39

Post by carlivar »

dave1619 wrote: post #8

I've owned a Model 3 for over 5 months now with almost 6k miles on it. All I can attest to is my personal experience and the experience of some friends who also own a Model 3. Performance and handling on this car is truly amazing. Autopilot (at least in my personal experience) has been excellent. That said I understand the limitations of Autopilot and keep cautious oversight when it's on. I've head a few minor issues…

How do you like the touchscreen? This has always been my biggest concern. I don't like non tactile controls, and it sounds like some fairly simple and common features like mirror adjustments are buried in menus. Taking eye off the road for that screen doesn't sound good?

Re: Edmunds Tesla Model 3 Long-Term Road Test Update for April

#40

Post by userbinator »

flyGuyOnTheSly wrote: post #35
userbinator wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did you expect? Tape is not uncommon. Pretty much all mirrors are held on with double-sided tape, or some other soft adhesive.

>What did you expect? Some actual engineering of a snap together framework at the very least? (Which would be even cheaper than just taping it together in the long run...) Some nuts and bolts, perhaps? I have never heard of a mirror "falling off" of any consumer car unless it was in some kind of accident... especially not after a few months of ownership... of a $56,000 car...

Some nuts and bolts, perhaps?

It's a piece of glass. Adding such fastening would increase the cost of assembly significantly. Double-sided tape is an industry standard. Cars costing more and less than $56k use it. It just appears that it wasn't very good tape in this case. Good double-sided tape can stick very, very well.

Post reply on HN