Bimmerfest BMW banner

3921 - 3940 of 4286 Posts

·
Driver
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
I've driven a Model 3 with the 19s, and it doesn't surprise me that they handle and stop a little bit better in the dry than the 18s. I've heard they're pretty good in the wet but not so good in the snow and ice, but that is again anecdotal. In any case, a set of PS4s tires will just kill them in the dry.


In any case, your contention that "Tesla uses inflated ECO tires on their cars, you can't compare consumption numbers 1:1 to other cars. These ECO tires are pretty slippery in rain. Tesla doesn't care about your safety. All they care about marketing." is obviously false.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
Again, you're going with anecdotal info. In the right circumstances, any tire will hydroplane and any EV can get over its rated mileage given the right circumstances. Like you, I could find anecdotal information showing just about anything I want, but that doesn't make it right or meaningful.

Tirerack's ratings show the Michelin Primacy MXM4 as roughly in the middle of the Grand Touring All-Season category with its wet performance somewhat above the middle of the range. At least this is an average of a whole bunch of anecdotal opinions. :)
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?clearSize=true&type=GTAS&VT=
Note that none of the other cars hydroplaned in that section.

You also ignored how many owners blame these tires on TMC in that thread

Additionally tirerack uses correct tire pressures
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
Tesla's standard mode is kind of a medium regen that automatically adjusts based on speed. The 41-45PSI ECO tires are the tires that Tesla provides and the pressures that it recommends and are the same tires that get used in regular tests of the cars. For EPA testing, don't you think a car should be tested in the configuration that the manufacturer delivers to the customer and which it recommends?

My LR AWD Model 3 is rated for 310 miles of range. On a warm day and keeping speeds to 65MPH or less on level ground, I have seen a rate of power usage which would work out to 310 miles or more on a number of occasions. I've never driven it more than 290 miles without recharging since I don't want to take a chance of running out of electricity and always leave a buffer. On the day when I drove it 290 miles, it showed I had another 50 miles of range left, but I had dropped 5,000 feet of altitude on the drive, it was a nice day, and speeds were mostly under 65.

Consumer Reports in their test of the Model 3 exceeded the rated range. Do you think that their results are bogus? There have been a number of Youtube videos over the years where Tesla owners have exceeded the rated range on their cars as well. Do you think they're all lying?
I want to add here that consumer reports reached 350mi with default regen setting and 310mi with weak regen setting.
 

·
Driver
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
I want to add here that consumer reports reached 350mi with default regen setting and 310mi with weak regen setting.
Default being the key term there. Default manufacturer settings are what are used by most organizations, including the EPA, when testing a vehicle. The default setting is called "Standard"; the weak regen setting is called "Low", and Tesla specifically recommends it for use in snow or icy conditions. I don't think too many owners switch into Low for any other reason.
 

·
Driver
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
Note that none of the other cars hydroplaned in that section.

You also ignored how many owners blame these tires on TMC in that thread

Additionally tirerack uses correct tire pressures
I've proven you to be factually incorrect when you stated, "Tesla uses inflated ECO tires on their cars, you can't compare consumption numbers 1:1 to other cars. These ECO tires are pretty slippery in rain. Tesla doesn't care about your safety. All they care about marketing." If you want to keep beating that dead horse, have fun, but I'm done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
Default being the key term there. Default manufacturer settings are what are used by most organizations, including the EPA, when testing a vehicle. The default setting is called "Standard"; the weak regen setting is called "Low", and Tesla specifically recommends it for use in snow or icy conditions. I don't think too many owners switch into Low for any other reason.
But it makes EPA numbers not comparable. Companies who decide to use lower default regen wlll get lower EPA numbers.
If you look at the EPA city cycle you notice how important regen is. And this test weights 55% in the final results. While highway cycle I shared earlier is weighted at 45%. (but even the highway cycle is slow compared to a road trip) EPA rated range has little to do what a car can reach on a road trip where range matters.


 

Attachments

·
Driver
Joined
·
2,763 Posts
But it makes EPA numbers not comparable. Companies who decide to use lower default regen wlll get lower EPA numbers.
If you look at the EPA city cycle you notice how important regen is. And this test weights 55% in the final results. While highway cycle I shared earlier is weighted at 45%. (but even the highway cycle is slow compared to a road trip) EPA rated range has little to do what a car can reach on a road trip where range matters.


What a silly argument. EPA, like Consumer Reports, and most other organizations that test cars, do so in the configuration recommended by the manufacturer. The results are therefore reflective of how the vehicle owners will normally use their cars and that is what the EPA is testing. Other manufacturers are free to set up their cars as they like, Tesla has no advantage or disadvantage in this regard.

As for the EPA's rated range, Teslas and other EVs all have to go with the same standards that are supposed to reflect the overall average usage of cars. If you don't like the EPA's standards, you should talk to them. In any case, Teslas generally do better on the highway than most other EVs due to being more aerodynamic. The base Taycan is the only EV that I know of with a better Cd than the Tesla Model 3 or S, and it's a pretty small difference at .22 to .23. The higher spec Taycan Turbo S has a Cd of .25.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #3,928
An hour ago Tesla factory was deemed non-essential business by Alameda County Public Health and will be shutdown to protect its 10k workers.

This decision went against Musk's intent to keep factory running.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I posted a comparison between my E90 and Model 3 on reddit and basically people disagreed with me but I anticipated that since most people didn't have any seat time on both cars.

My main complaint was that the Model 3 wasn't as good as a driver's oriented car as my E90. The main thing was the fuel savings, torque, and tech. But other than those things the Model 3 wasn't polished enough vs my E90.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible but it's not possible for Tesla fans who are upset with my review.

I mentioned these things:

- The fake leather seats just doesn't feel high quality enough once you sit on it long enough, cost cutting measure.

- Heated steering wheel should be included to save energy and not rely on electric heater fan. I'm ok driving with just the heated wheel/seats on my E90 during winter, usually warms me up. The Tesla I have to use heat it is so darn cold inside without heat.

- Handling of the car is very tricky, the car can perform but the electronic stability is too intrusive and I never had one car that I had to fight ESP this much. On a Model 3 Performance with track mode, it's too dangerous to drive on regular roads. The amount of torque the car puts down I had the car almost on it's side pulling out of a turn.

- The rear view mirror is too tiny, I know the screen has rear camera but it's difficult to drive without the rear view mirror which is eye level. Having to check the center screen makes you lower your eye. I often just drive with the 3D map which lets me see what cars are around me instead.

I'm not saying it's a bad car, just overall not a good driver's car. It's designed for commuting not for road enthusiast. Comparing to my E90 which lacks the HP but the handling is much more predictable and better turn in than the Model 3 which doesn't like sharp angle turns it will pull you back slows you down even though it has a lot of grip with AWD. I'm constantly fighting the ESP.
 

·
Novice driver
Joined
·
3,897 Posts
An hour ago Tesla factory was deemed non-essential business by Alameda County Public Health and will be shutdown to protect its 10k workers.
For a pyramid scheme like Tesla, being deemed a "non-essential business" should be an honor! :rofl:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
For a pyramid scheme like Tesla, being deemed a "non-essential business" should be an honor! :rofl:
Statements like this are what upset people. I have zero problem with Vision33r's comments. He did an honest comparison. Some things I agree with and others I disagree with but the opinions are his. However, calling Tesla a pyramid scheme is a huge stretch. You might disagree with the way the company is run or not like their financials. However, I have a hard time viewing it as a pyramid scheme. Musk is on an aggressive growth plan. It may be too aggressive and the company may not survive but that doesn't make it a pyramid scheme.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #3,932 (Edited)
However, calling Tesla a pyramid scheme is a huge stretch.
By definition a pyramid scheme needs new customers to pay returns/gains to previous customers, so Tesla does not look like a pyramid scheme in the context of retail customers.

From another perspective, Tesla does raise rounds after rounds of money to finance its operations, and Tesla does use money raised in current rounds to repay principal and pay interest from previous rounds, like in a pyramid scheme.

Tesla, and any company that keeps seeking new money to pay off existing obligation, e.g. US govt(?!?), can get into trouble when new investors do not bite.

The chance of that happening to Tesla is a lot higher than US govt. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
By definition a pyramid scheme needs new customers to pay returns/gains to previous customers, so Tesla does not look like a pyramid scheme in the context of retail customers.

From another perspective, Tesla does raise rounds after rounds of money to finance its operations, and Tesla does use money raised in current rounds to repay principal and pay interest from previous rounds, like in a pyramid scheme.

Tesla, and any company that keeps seeking new money to pay off existing obligation, e.g. US govt(?!?), can get into trouble when new investors do not bite.

The chance of that happening to Tesla is a lot higher than US govt. :)
Tesla is best viewed as an aggressive growth company with all of the positives and negatives that implies. Tesla could be very profitable if they weren't aggressively growing but they would be run over by other companies later on. They are in a grow or die situation. Their margins are good but they have to grow crazy fast before their advantages erode away. The danger is that this crazy growth strategy leaves them vulnerable to cashflow issues. Both Apple and Google have tried to buy them in the past so I guess that is the downside scenario.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,281 Posts
Discussion Starter #3,934
Tesla is best viewed as an aggressive growth company with all of the positives and negatives that implies. Tesla could be very profitable if they weren't aggressively growing but they would be run over by other companies later on. They are in a grow or die situation. Their margins are good but they have to grow crazy fast before their advantages erode away. The danger is that this crazy growth strategy leaves them vulnerable to cashflow issues. Both Apple and Google have tried to buy them in the past so I guess that is the downside scenario.
Tesla's current(depressed?) mkt cap of 80B prices itself out from acquisition. Tesla is priced as a high growth tech stock, and drops more than other tech stocks with huge cash moats.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
71 Posts
Tesla's current(depressed?) mkt cap of 80B prices itself out from acquisition. Tesla is priced as a high growth tech stock, and drops more than other tech stocks with huge cash moats.
I totally agree. However, if things turned bad the stock would drop. At $100/share it would be well below what has been offered in the past.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
BMW with its own battery chemistry has pretty good degradation results.



Insideevs guessed 4% degradation for their i3 at 69k mi.
Tesla Bjorn's test shows 10% degradation for a 22kWh i3 after 62k miles.

2014 BMW i3 22kWH
EPA hwy cycle: 102mi

2012 Tesla Model S 85D
EPA hwy cycle: 335mi


62k mi equals to 608 charge cycle based on the EPA hwy cycle above. Cycle number is most likely more since people drive faster than the EPA cycle, but this is a good reference.

608 charge cycle for the Model S based on the EPA hwy cycle ratio above means 608*335 = 204k mi.



There aren't many capacity tests with 200k mi Teslas so I can't give the exact example but here are some from Bjorn:

Model X P90D 47k mi degradation: 6%
Model X P90D 62k mi degradation: 8%
Model S 85 62k mi degradation: 4%


Adding to the list: https://insideevs.com/news/405885/tesla-model-s-battery-after-146000-miles/

Model S 70D 146k mi 5 years (1000 cycle) degradation: 15%
Total lifetime consumption: 59675kWh
That is 59.7kWh/146k mi = 409Wh/mi (includes vampire drain)
Battery efficiency: 59675/63298 = 94.3% (this includes self discharge when parked)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
I posted a comparison between my E90 and Model 3 on reddit and basically people disagreed with me but I anticipated that since most people didn't have any seat time on both cars.

My main complaint was that the Model 3 wasn't as good as a driver's oriented car as my E90. The main thing was the fuel savings, torque, and tech. But other than those things the Model 3 wasn't polished enough vs my E90.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible but it's not possible for Tesla fans who are upset with my review.

I mentioned these things:

- The fake leather seats just doesn't feel high quality enough once you sit on it long enough, cost cutting measure.

- Heated steering wheel should be included to save energy and not rely on electric heater fan. I'm ok driving with just the heated wheel/seats on my E90 during winter, usually warms me up. The Tesla I have to use heat it is so darn cold inside without heat.

- Handling of the car is very tricky, the car can perform but the electronic stability is too intrusive and I never had one car that I had to fight ESP this much. On a Model 3 Performance with track mode, it's too dangerous to drive on regular roads. The amount of torque the car puts down I had the car almost on it's side pulling out of a turn.

- The rear view mirror is too tiny, I know the screen has rear camera but it's difficult to drive without the rear view mirror which is eye level. Having to check the center screen makes you lower your eye. I often just drive with the 3D map which lets me see what cars are around me instead.

I'm not saying it's a bad car, just overall not a good driver's car. It's designed for commuting not for road enthusiast. Comparing to my E90 which lacks the HP but the handling is much more predictable and better turn in than the Model 3 which doesn't like sharp angle turns it will pull you back slows you down even though it has a lot of grip with AWD. I'm constantly fighting the ESP.
Lot of people buy it for the mission and for Elon. Since they don't understand technical details and are often not car guys, they believe everything what Elon says. It is impossible to reach them with different opinions. Specially now that the share price is in the sky. This gives them more confidence.
 

·
Swedish Murder Machine
Joined
·
4,386 Posts
Lot of people buy it for the mission and for Elon. Since they don't understand technical details and are often not car guys, they believe everything what Elon says. It is impossible to reach them with different opinions. Specially now that the share price is in the sky. This gives them more confidence.
Absurd. Virtually everyone who came from a BMW and went to a Tesla is a "car guy". Sure, it's not as refined interior wise as a BMW but driver experience? Way better. Handles better. Faster. What more does a "car guy" want?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,550 Posts
Absurd. Virtually everyone who came from a BMW and went to a Tesla is a "car guy". Sure, it's not as refined interior wise as a BMW but driver experience? Way better. Handles better. Faster. What more does a "car guy" want?
I drove one and don't share your opinion. My stick shift with proper suspension is much more fun.

Consumer Reports results don't support it either. Despite the immediate torque it scores lower in driving experience. People enjoy driving the less powerful and mostly automatic BMWs more.

https://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13279497&postcount=3893
 
3921 - 3940 of 4286 Posts
Top