Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries • Hacker News Board

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#431

Post by blendo » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:23 PM UTC

codeulike wrote: post #244

Compare to the Audi e-Tron, which has a fairly massive 95kWH battery but only scores 204 miles of EPA range. They claim they're only using 88% of the battery capacity so that charging is faster and battery longevity is preserved, but thats a really weird engineering decision that belies the fact they have made a terribly inefficient (and perhaps rapidly degrading?) battery pack/drivetrain. Meanwhile the base Model S,…

But the Audi e-Tron is incredibly massive: curb weight of about 5600 lbs/2500 kg.

The Model S is closer to 4600-4900 lbs. The Niro EV is about 3800 lbs.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#432

Post by Robotbeat » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:23 PM UTC

marvin wrote: post #397

codeulike wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course. I'm not trying to play a game of 'my EV is better than that EV' (nb I drive a Leaf). I'm pointing out that many people underestimated the lead Tesla has in EV technology. This year we've seen major, and esteemed, automakers put things into production that are clearly years behind what Tesla can do. I'm glad they are joining in, but I'm just trying to set the record straight. FWIW the Kia Niro EV (and the H…

Also, energy efficiency means lower costs. If you need a 20% bigger pack for the same range, that’s almost a 20% more expensive pack. That’s the entire profit margin of a profitable car model.

Exactly this. It’s also thousands of dollars worth of energy cost over the vehicle’s lifetime and enhances the effective charging rate (miles charged per minute). It also reduces weight.

Efficiency is hugely important for profitable and desirable electric vehicles and significantly enhances the environmental advantage as well.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#433

Post by leesec » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:25 PM UTC

cmsonger wrote: post #368

teej wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You go on the website, click a couple boxes, and it tells you a price. You pay what you see on the website. How is that more confusing than a regular dealership?

The model I saw last week when I was thinking about buying is different than the model I saw this week. The price I saw last week for the set of features I remember selecting is different than the price I see this week. They need to calm the rate of change here. It's been all over the map in Q1.

Ever heard of sales? Companies do this constantly.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#434

Post by floatingatoll » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:25 PM UTC

brianpgordon wrote: post #301

floatingatoll wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumers don’t care what yesterday’s prices or options were, prior to a purchase anyways. They care what today’s price is, what rebates are available, and what financing options are available for it.

I just don't think that's true. You don't make a decision like what kind of car to buy in a single day. If you're doing your research and comparing options, and the prices are shifting out from under you every couple of weeks it makes for a frustrating experience. Reviews and press coverage might be tailored to a particular price point and be difficult to interpret if the price has shifted since the reviewer wrote it…

I spent eighteen months researching my car and six more months waiting for it to arrive. It didn’t even have a price for the first year, but I knew approximately what to expect and I paid approximately what I expected. I forgot the exact price within 24 hours of the day it arrived, I got a final quote, and paid it. (I can tell you exactly what my loan payment was, though!)

The price matters between when you decide to commit and when you actually commit. If you accept a range of prices, the the price matters less than your timing in any potential discount or package benefit cycles.

It is difficult to care about (Tesla price guess here!) $45k vs $44k vs $46k, but is extremely easy to care about seeing the price drop $1k the day, or the day after you purchase it.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#435

Post by _ea1k » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:26 PM UTC

dwighttk wrote: post #356

gutnor wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely about battery capacity and range. Tesla have consistently delivered in that side of things. The core of their car business is solid. Their problem on the production side is not surprising. Missing deadlines and production targets is business as usual for "startups" (between quotes because they are massive, however still very much a new and small player in that field) "We will deliver million of widget in 2 y…

>but they are bound by their claim that every car is fully autonomous ready. are they? Didn't they already claim that for cars with the previous generation of computer?

Yes, by promising an upgrade.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#436

Post by jonknee » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:26 PM UTC

jfoster wrote: post #292

dannyw wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depreciation matters.

Depreciation for any given trip will never be anywhere near the price of a plane ticket or two, though.

Why not? These are really expensive cars (especially Model S and X). An $80,000 car that has a life of 500,000 miles is $.16 a mile. This hypothetical NY to Miami trip is 1,300 miles one way. If you do no driving in Miami that's 2600 miles or $416 in depreciation if all miles counted the same (they don't, the first miles depreciate things a lot more). You can easily get a plane ticket for that, two if you look around.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#437

Post by Faark » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:26 PM UTC

navigatesol wrote: post #348

Isinlor wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Independent researchers have already proven Musk to be 100% right about LIDAR. Pseudo-LiDAR from Visual Depth Estimation: Bridging the Gap in 3D Object Detection for Autonomous Driving https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.07179 3D object detection is an essential task in autonomous driving. Recent techniques excel with highly accurate detection rates, provided the 3D input data is obtained from precise but expensive LiDAR tech…

> Independent researchers have already proven Musk to be 100% right about LIDAR. Well, you better let all the other smart people doing this work know! They're all doomed! Why do you think it's one or the other-neural nets and LIDAR-, and not both? The more sensors the better.

Because the question isn't about what a theoretical best system consists of. No one (including Musk) denies more sensors could theoretically be beneficial. Adding a gravitational wave detector to your car would ensure the car doesn't accidentally drive into black holes, making it more safe. This additional safety would not be economical.

Same principle with LIDAR. Adding $5k hardware per car and a ton of R&D doesn't seem economical to Tesla, since they think they can get pretty much the same with just their current sensor suit. Time will tell if they are right and what AP + sensor suite customers will choose.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#438

Post by leesec » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:31 PM UTC

jamilbk wrote: post #203

Question for Tesla owners: Is the recharge time ever a problem? Have you ever felt regret from not being able to just pull up to a gas station, refuel, and be on your way? Part of me drools with child-like giddiness at the prospect of owning one, but part of me hesitates at the thought of taking roadtrips in one.

I'm a recent Model 3 owner.

Waking up with a full tank everyday is SWEET.

For road trips, you just have to plan for a bit extra time, but it's often how much you would stop anyways. For example, if you're on a 4 hour road trip, you'd prolly stop for 20 minutes at some point to stretch/get gas/grab a coffee. This is really all the time you'd need to juice up, especially when Supercharger's V3 start becoming common.

It is a bit of an extra consideration but I would say it's not really a deterrent.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#439

Post by _ea1k » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:31 PM UTC

navigatesol wrote: post #350

sidcool wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's highly unlikely. This is a public event and they will be held even more accountable than when Elon tweets something. Lying at such a stage would risk their reputation. So I say it's unlikely, not impossible though.

> Lying at such a stage would risk their reputation. But the thing is, the fans never say it's a lie. Battery swaps, Solar Shingles, Alien Dreadnought factory producing so quickly you need strobe lights to see machines, Full-Self Driving, profits forever, robot taxis...these are not lies, they are simply things that haven't happened yet. Years ago the guy literally walked onto a Hollywood set and demonstrated the Sol…

The only bit there that I disagree with is the battery swap. They actually did that, and I think it pretty visibly demonstrated what a dead end that approach was likely to be.

Otherwise, though, you are right, and they even prepped for that in the presentation. I always get it done, just not on time. So when this isn't done in 2020... well, 2022 then. They make great cars, IMO, but this stuff is more than a little annoying.

Re: Changes to Models S and X allow them to travel longer without larger batteries

#440

Post by jdavis703 » Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 2:38 PM UTC

benj111 wrote: post #233

jdavis703 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone died mining our hypothetical battery, that is a choice they made (assuming that we all know working in mines is dangerous). OTOH we have little choice in breathing in smog... clean air is a communal resource we all have to share. And the problem isn’t your gas vehicle that you rarely use, it’s the general concept of everyone from Volkswagen to our local auto sports enthusiasts thinking their smog doesn’t r…

I assume there's a mortality rate for software developers. Is it therefore the software developers fault if they die on the job? Should we shrug a point out that that career was their choice? Does this thinking extend to other activities? The mortality rate for sleeping in non zero after all....

I guess I’d draw an analogy to astronauts, firefighters or race car drivers. Obviously mining, firefighting, space flight and racing should be made as safe as possible from a worker’a rights perspective. But anyone going in to those careers hopefully understands the risks!

And thanks for the reply, I was wondering what the downvotes were about — my comment apparently was blasé, especially since many miners frequently don’t have much other economic opportunity.