Don't forget that it will be much easier to get a perfect launch with the Model S. Also interesting is that almost none of the Maserati 0-60 times were faster than the MSP's 4.4 seconds.
GSP
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
My New Model S by Soflauthor (First 24 Hours and then 1 week later...)
- Thread starter Soflauthor
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model S
Don't forget that it will be much easier to get a perfect launch with the Model S. Also interesting is that almost none of the Maserati 0-60 times were faster than the MSP's 4.4 seconds.
GSP
steve841
Active Member
There were 95 miles on the odometer at delivery.
- - - Updated - - -
You are undoubtedly right, Josh, but it was still fun!
Wow, that seems high. Is that what most are seeing? Must be doing some pretty extensive road testing before they send them out. Not sure I've ever taken delivery of a new vehicle with more than about 10 miles.
95 on mine as well.
From what my delivery specialists said, that is fairly typical. He said much of that is done on dynometers. Not sure how much though, it wasn't important to me so I didn't ask more.
Heh, and s far as 10 miles, I have never bought a car where the odometer was that low
. I think 16 was the shortest.Same here. A tad dyslexic under certain conditions. I'm not even sure if it is dyslexia.
I get disoriented if North is not up. I can't have people tell me to turn left or turn right, instead I need them to tell me to turn North or turn East. Those directions are in the same place all the time!
The odd thing is that I have a great sense of direction. I don't get lost in the woods or in unfamiliar cities. One look at a a zoomed-out map (North Up) and I am set. But the GPS's that turn all the time as you change direction mess me up. I get teased by people for having to think too long about left and right, but those are the people that get lost all the time.
Can't recall if I posted this once or not, but a fellow told me some nav company did a study and people really fall into two camps. Yours where folks mentally picture from above and NWES matters. Others picture things mentally from a POV and so maps need to face the way they're facing. It's some sort of inherent difference in the way people visualize.
A similar concept applies to simple things like slides in a projector or powerpoint. Should the up arrow or down arrow move you forward a slide? Some people visualize themselves walking on the slides like a sidewalk, so the up arrow is moving forward to the next slide. Others visualize themselves standing still and pulling the slides past them, thus the down button means to pull the current slide past them so they can see the next slide. Whether up or down means "show the next slide" depends on that mental view.
It's sort of intriguing stuff, but the bottom line for a Nav vendor is you need both models.
Arnold Panz
Model Sig 304, VIN 542
Very interesting ckessel -- this is like when Apple changed its mouse wheel to do the opposite of what Windows does, where scrolling towards you pulls up on the page on screen, not down.
I never thought about it -- I definitely prefer my GPS set with North at the top, but I always thought that was because I'm old enough to have used map books and such pre-internet and and would have found it ridiculous to be physically moving the map book around to follow each turn, so I learned to turn "right" when heading left if I was going south (for example).
That's exactly right, very much the same thing. A similar thing happens with "mouse look" whether pushing the mouse forward means look up or down. For folks like me, I think of looking up as tilting my head back and thus back means pull the mouse back to look up. Others have the more obvious moving the mouse "up" (forward) means look up. Folks coming from a pilot background tend to be the former (I'm not and never was a pilot, I just happen to fall into that mental category).
Anyway, way off topic, except that it's really kind of cool to realize why folks get fixated on why maps have a "right" way to orient
strider
Active Member
Dude seriously? I just went back and looked at the pics again and the panel gaps look great. I still don't like the chrome strip under the doors but that was a design decision. I think manufacturing is dialed in here.
I had a similar thought when I first saw the pictures, but I think that's the camera(phone) accentuating the contrast of the image.
gg_got_a_tesla
Model S: VIN 65513, Model 3: VIN 1913
Maybe, onlinespending's marveling (sorry, DC!) at how good the gaps have gotten?!
Yeah. I think the left side of the car door gaps look really bad (as seen in the 2nd pic). Especially the front door gaps. That's a straight on shot, so no odd effects from the angle of the shot or anything. Just one man's opinion. Car looks gorgeous otherwise though!
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
I have to agree with Strider here - I think the manufacturing is really dialed in. The car looks great!
Rather than relying on pictures of the car, I'm lucky enough to have the car. So ... I walked out to the garage and using the measuring tools I've used for the CCI, I measured the gaps.
Here's what I found:
The vertical door gaps have a nominal width of about 2.5 mm and vary by 1 mm along their entire length .
The gaps on the upper part of the door that are not vertical have a nominal width of about 4 mm and vary by 1 to 1.5 mm.
The gaps on the back lift gate are wider still than the door gaps with a nominal width of about 5 - 6 mm, but vary by about the same 1 to 1.5 mm.
Frankly, it's too late here to google industry standards for premium cars so that I can present comparative data, so I leave that to others.
No one who has seen the car, given me complements in parking lots, or ridden in it has mentioned the gaps. Suffice to say, I'm not going to return the car
- - - Updated - - -
I do plan on writing another report in a couple of days and posting it here.
Here's what I found:
The vertical door gaps have a nominal width of about 2.5 mm and vary by 1 mm along their entire length .
The gaps on the upper part of the door that are not vertical have a nominal width of about 4 mm and vary by 1 to 1.5 mm.
The gaps on the back lift gate are wider still than the door gaps with a nominal width of about 5 - 6 mm, but vary by about the same 1 to 1.5 mm.
Frankly, it's too late here to google industry standards for premium cars so that I can present comparative data, so I leave that to others.
No one who has seen the car, given me complements in parking lots, or ridden in it has mentioned the gaps. Suffice to say, I'm not going to return the car
- - - Updated - - -
I do plan on writing another report in a couple of days and posting it here.
Suffice to say, I'm not going to return the car
And ultimately that's what matters most. As long as you're content with the gaps and happy with the car, then who cares if it has slightly wider panel gaps than other automobiles?
But just for kicks I wanted to compare it to another silver car, a Lexus. The Model S certainly has wider gaps, but I think what exacerbates the gaps is the fact that the seams extend to the base of the car, as opposed to other cars such as this Lexus. So some of it may be the illusion created by these long seams.
smorgasbord
Active Member
Here's one for the BMW M5
And for a Volvo C70
Soflauthor's measurements are pretty much in line with those cars.
Of course, Elon wants something an order of magnitude better. To quote him:
From http://green.autoblog.com/2012/09/07/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-q-and-a/
I'm withholding judgement until I can see a production car in person.
