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

Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 408 posts

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#301

Post by wooster »

dingaling wrote: post #188
johnward wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" the shields prevented any damage that could cause a fire or penetrate the existing quarter inch of ballistic grade aluminum armor plate that already protects the battery pack" Ballistic grade aluminum armor plate... If there is one thing Tesla does well it is publicity. I know there are high strength steels but it seems like they want something that is strong and light. If it sounds like something impenetrable to t…

> Ballistic grade aluminum armor plate... That's from the same marketing phrase-book as 'aircraft-grade aluminium'. Lightweight armour ( e.g. personal protection ) uses ceramic plates. Heavy armour ( e.g. tanks ) still uses steel alloys with composite and plastic layers. There were a few AFVs with aluminium armour, such as the M113 and Sheridan, but ballistic protection was restricted to small-arms and light shrapnel…

A quick Google search indicates that it's used commonly in armored cars and military vehicles.

eg: http://www.alcoa.com/global/en/products/product.asp?prod_id=...

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#302

Post by the_rightwayz »

rkalla wrote: post #300

This is what you get when a company/group/effort/community is lead by a "benevolent dictator" - someone with an absolutely pure vision of what they want their output to look like and the autonomy and strength to make it so no matter what. I love this... I actually love that it probably pissed off Musk to no end the amount of attention the fires got and out of spite he went totally over the top and added ballistic pla…

This is a great fix - they will blow apart the competition, fire past the doubters, burn the naysayers and smoke the market!

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#303

Post by Fomite »

exelius wrote: post #288
akerl_ wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a citation for that claim?

I think a lot of people still think of the Tesla Roadster, not the Model S. The Roadster is definitely a sports car, but the Model S is like a BMW 5-series... Yeah, it's fast, but the people who can afford one are generally old/mature enough to know not to drive recklessly on public roads.

...you don't know the same middle aged and affluent people I do.

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#304

Post by SilasX »

pc86 wrote: post #189
pjc50 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GM is currently recalling 1.6M cars which can accidentally turn off while driving: http://www.thewire.com/business/2014/03/gm-recall-mary-barra... (this has apparently resulted in a number of deaths, as the power steering stops working)

And just to give a sense of the orders of magnitude: 1,600,000 29,000

Or you could just report recalls as a percentage of production, and have a meaningful metric to being with...

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#305

Post by Retric »

sliverstorm wrote: post #231
DVassallo wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. Here's what happens to a Ford Focus that crashes into a concrete wall at ~100mph: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmRkPyuet_o

Ah yes, because a Tesla would leave you unscratched if you collided with the same immovable wall?

I don't know about Tesla but 120MPH head on collisions like that are in fact survivable without serious injury given the correct car design. People can safely decelerate at 45g's which takes 10.4 feet from 120MPH. Of course in most cases your going to slow down a little before impact and or not hit an immovable wall so cars are generally optimized for lower impact velocity's.

The closest real world example is probably Nascar. Granted, there track design make head on collisions rather difficult but as cars regularly hit 190MPH you do occasionally get near head on collisions at around 120MPH which are often survivable. Best example I could find was: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QVlj7...

PS: The much more common 60MPH drivers side impact is also survivable which I still find shocking.

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#306

Post by MBCook »

baddox wrote: post #247
MBCook wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only were they aware of the problem, they did the calculus and decided to release a brand new model knowing this issue effected . http://consumerist.com/2014/03/25/gm-knew-chevy-cobalt-ignit...

Isn't it true that every car manufacturer will be aware of some level of risk and will have to make decisions based on that? There's always more you can put in a car to make it safer, but at some point you stop and release the car. Note that I'm not saying this particular case is justified. I'm just saying that it's a continuum, and I'm not sure how we should expect car manufacturers to draw the line on the continuum…

Certainly. Knowing that a car may lose control if it runs over the alternator that fell off another car at highway speeds (as shown in the Tesla video) is one thing. Knowing the car can randomly shut off including airbags at highway speeds is another.

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#307

Post by steveklabnik »

johnward wrote: post #296
steveklabnik wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pittsburgh has more interesting cars than I'd expected: I've seen an orange lambo or two, and an Enzo... Not to mention all the cool stuff that comes out during the Vintage Grand Prix.

Hey Steve, not sure if you remember me from Vivisimo/PGH.RB but nice to see you drop here. I have yet to see an Enzo, I actually can't remember the last Ferrari I saw in the area. There is a GTR parked in front of the building every now and then and that is exciting in PA. In CA that's just an every day sight.

:D

Totally agree about the usual-ness. I see four or five Model Ses a day now.

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#308

Post by mpg33 »

rkalla wrote: post #300

This is what you get when a company/group/effort/community is lead by a "benevolent dictator" - someone with an absolutely pure vision of what they want their output to look like and the autonomy and strength to make it so no matter what. I love this... I actually love that it probably pissed off Musk to no end the amount of attention the fires got and out of spite he went totally over the top and added ballistic pla…

> This is what you get when a company/group/effort/community is lead by a "benevolent dictator" - someone with an absolutely pure vision of what they want their output to look like and the autonomy and strength to make it so no matter what.

Good explanation of Steve Jobs as well IMO

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#309

Post by joncrocks »

Crito wrote: post #298
alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla was handled with kid gloves compared to Toyota. Remember the unintended acceleration crock?

The Toyota Acceleration issue ranks up there with the McDonald's Coffee lawsuit as one of the most doubly misunderstood corporate events in recent history. Popular belief has there being an acceleration problem with Toyota cars. Slightly less popular is the correction that in fact it was all just senile old people and floor mats, nothing to do with the computers. Far less common is the correction that there were in f…

Excellent summary. 5 stars, would read again.

Re: Tesla Adds Titanium Underbody Shield and Aluminum Deflector Plates to Model S

#310

Post by wtallis »

tunesmith wrote: post #274
SixSigma wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look what they did to Toyota over the Sudden Unrequested Acceleration that never was. $1.6bn fine! EDIT: By they I mean the Media. I guess I should add some substance. http://www.nasa.gov/topics/nasalife/features/nesc-toyota-stu... NASA's Toyota Study Released by Dept. of Transportation 02.08.11 WASHINGTON -- The results of a ten-month study by 30 NASA engineers of possible electronic causes of unintended acceleratio…

I don't know what to believe about this. Wasn't it just all over the news that an embedded software engineer found all sorts of code quality problems with Toyota and could even demonstrate unintended acceleration via various bugs?

And there were some drivetrain software bugs that Toyota did acknowledge and fix (at least partially). My '07 Camry was dangerous to operate for the first few months before a firmware update. Prior to the update, it would accelerate well from 0 to about 15-20, but then almost coast for a few seconds before the speed would increase further. It felt like my 4-cylinder was suffering from severe turbo lag, and it made turning onto busy thoroughfares quite scary when the speed limit was 45 or more.
Post reply on HN