This is probably very helpful for those who can understand what the person is saying.
You can't see how ridiculously slowly the display is responding?
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is probably very helpful for those who can understand what the person is saying.
You can't see how ridiculously slow the display is responding?
100% agree with the addition of high rolling resistance. Even if everything in the list has been solved, the reduced range would keep airless tires off the Cybrtrk. As far as I know, the state of the art of airless tires is they are great for backhoes.Unless there have been some improvements in airless tires that I don't know about, you will be disappointed. Airless tires have unacceptable disadvantages at the moment (noise and harshness, lack of high-speed capability and difficulty with heat dissipation) which is why even vehicles in Presidental motorcades have run-flats, not airless tires.
So does Nissan. Just try getting service for a Leaf, unless you are willing to leave the car for an extended period, or perhaps go to a different Nissan dealer because the single Leaf tech has quit or is on vacation. We have a Leaf because Denise didn't want to drive an S size car and in 2015 there wasn't a viable alternative. Ford will do no better. You're assuming that Ford will have Tesla quality service--ain't gonna happen. All you'll get from Ford is dealer type service with pressure to have extra unneeded, but costly, service performed.Dealerships everywhere, service centers everywhere
Dealerships everywhere, service centers everywhere (to include model Y and maybe 3) and a back door to full federal tax rebate. That is what Ford offers. Look at the specs and versions. There is almost 0 chance this is not a model Y skate. Will they actually announce the partnership and will Elon be there are my only unknowns.
We use the frunk on every trip. It's the best suitcase ever.It has that big hood with a largish frunk but my experience is that most people use the frunk reservedly so I don't know if that space will be optimally utilized.
Obsolete would be a better term then junk. They certainly weren't junk when first installed--it's just that the technology has advanced.From what we know, or what is rumored, battery PACKS have NOT been a limiting factor since about Fall 2017 when Tesla replaced the useless junk automated bty pack robots with Grohmann v1 bty pack robots.
PaywalledToni Sacconaghi reiterates 325 price target
3 Reasons Tesla's (TSLA) Pickup Unlikely to be a Major Catalyst - Bernstein
You mean like the three month wait for one the of Prius' services, or the one month wait for one of the VW services? Compared to the one day wait for the Tesla?Unfortunately, many Tesla owners need to take their cars to actual service centers where waits can be very long.
If that wasn't somewhat true, there would be a three year wait for your next Tesla. Though I haven't trusted traditional auto companies for decades--just couldn't do anything about it while still driving a car (anecdotal, not data).Most of the car buying public trust traditional auto companies more than Tesla
This actually correct. There is a reason Tesla has had more battery fires per unit than any other EV. NMC density is improving and newer formulations using less cobalt should be cheaper. Remember that all of Dahn's work has been with NMC chemistry, I expect Tesla will eventually switch to it, probably already being used in the Semi.Wrong on most points.
Prismatic cells (or rather packaging) wont change those properties of the batteries. Other car makers are using NMC type cell material which is safer but more expensive. Tesla uses NCA which is cheaper, has slightly higher energy density but not as safe (lower thermal runaway temperature).
NMC lasts longer than NCA. So wrong on that point as well.
At purely the cell level, using generic NMC and NCA cells from some random battery supplier, in a figurative (not literal) vacuum, these points may be valid.
However, everyone else continues to struggle and/or give up developing the necessary surrounding methods and technologies to take advantage of the supposed NMC advantages, piling inefficiency on inefficiency (packaging, thermal, production, materials costs, etc) to come out far behind what Tesla can achieve with the "inferior" NCA batteries. And that is ignoring the advances in chemistry Tesla has achieved, which nullify most of those supposed NMC advantages on their own ...
If you compare the fully integrated Tesla battery system to any other battery system, for essentially any metric nobody surpasses Tesla (or if they do, it comes at a significant cost or compromise - whether it be more expensive subsystems, reduced longevity, etc).
In theory, if Tesla decided to apply everything they know to using NMC cells, they could make a "superior" (based on your claims) battery system, but having already achieved being able to go a million miles with NCA the "longer lasting" is moot, and as for safer, Tesla has thus far shown that engineering can "solve" the thermal runaway issue (even with some older vehicles having had fires they are far slower and less deadly than equivalent ICE fires, with nearly everyone walking away from accidents they shouldn't have in an ICE, so NMC lasting just a few degrees longer before self igniting is moot - in most cases, they would have still burned if they were NMC, and especially comparing prismatic cells to cylindrical the difference in effective cooling might make a NMC prismatic more problematic than NCA cylindrical)
@Fact Checking thanks for linking to the FCA transcript. Not much has changed other than the targets drifting higher as diesel share goes down, though the worst offenders will be dropped to compensate, from 2020.I’ll try to find time this weekend (remote consulting gig this week) to dust off the model and rerun with the new FCA emission numbers (worse) and the possible effects of the merger.
The only thing the model will tell us is FCA's 2020/21 through 2024 penalty reduction as a function of EU ZEVs in the pooled fleet (from what we saw earlier this year, the numbers were grim for FCA to eliminate all penalties). What I don’t have insight into is 1) the number of in-house EU ZEVs FCA/PSA thinks they are going to sell (their current sales are minuscule), 2) the fraction of the penalty reduction FCA plans to pay Tesla in exchange for joining the pool. We can all play those games a posteriori when we know the penalty reduction value per ZEV.
@generalenthu performed some similar calculations and pointed out some potential issues with my methodology (since corrected), so his input would be valued.
AFAIK, Tesla's actual goal for road batteries is to eliminate the cobalt entirely, moving to a NA chemistry from NCA (and their NCA chemistry is already lower cobalt than everyone's NMC chemstries). They are buying NMC cells for some applications (storage, and IIRC Chinese Model 3s will get NMC cells once pack assembly is in China, before Tesla has their own cell lines), but otherwise...This actually correct. There is a reason Tesla has had more battery fires per unit than any other EV. NMC density is improving and newer formulations using less cobalt should be cheaper. Remember that all of Dahn's work has been with NMC chemistry, I expect Tesla will eventually switch to it, probably already being used in the Semi.