Hacker News Reader

Comment by dragontamer | Hacker News Reader

The tech sucks. Lack of 360 cameras. Lack of RADAR. Lack of Ultrasonic sensors. Lack of Android Auto/Apple Carplay. Lack of integrated Rearview mirror camera. Lack of Heads-up Display (let alone augmented reality HUDs integrated into the GPS navigation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8tl0KmqaqU)

That's just the standard tech everyone likes in cars in the year 2024. There's also the lack of physical windshield wiper controls, physical highbeams, or physical climate control buttons. (Everything is tablet-only for the ultimate cheapness / low-end experience).

----------

The funny thing is that we're in a situation where a 2016-era Model 3 has a better driving experience than the refresh. Well, you know, until they software-disabled the Ultrasonics and RADAR units to make the older model worse.

View on HN

I'm always fascinated to see a critique about a device (car in this case) that never once even mentions the core thing(s) the device is supposed to do.

You didn't even mention any of - fuel mileage, road noise, driver fatigue, comfort of seats, performance of HVAC, visibility, crash safety, passenger comfort and entertainment, storage volume, leg room. You know, transporting meat sacks safely, comfortably and cheaply.

I personally think it's because vehicle manufacturers have spent the last ~20 years not really improving the core vehicle at all, and instead convincing people that massage seats and car play are actually important. Personally I think they're a distraction from the fact most cars today get the same horrible mileage they did 20 years ago.

If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it.

And that is what EVs are. So far they're mostly focusing on the core product and have not spent the time or money on the fluff.

This is a $40,000 to $60,000 vehicle.

I have expectations. If I just wanted to safely transport people from pointA to pointB reliably and efficiently, the answer is a Toyota Corolla Hybrid at nearly half the cost.

If you're competing against $40k vehicles, then I think its fair to compare to... I dunno, an Ioniq 6 or something? Full EV, faster charging, better tech, better road noise, etc. etc. etc.

Tesla's core product, the car, has worse safety, tech, and other features than any competitor. And with regards to the Highland update, it doesn't even add any of the recent innovations that are "fashionable" in today's day-and-age.

Its 2024. A freaking Corolla has some of the features I listed above, at again, nearly half the price of a typical Tesla. Tesla's tech stack is severely out of date even with the update.

> If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it.

I think that's called a Ford Maverick. Ford Maverick ain't 70mpg, but its cheaper to drive than supercharger / fast chargers (where costs skyrocket for EVs to 30+ cents / kwhr).

I find this to be a weird perspective because EVs, and especially Tesla, seem to be focused entirely on fluff. That's one of the reasons they cost so damn much compared to ICE "economy" compacts.

Things like "pop out" door handles and steel body panels are fluff. A steering "yoke" is fluff. Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff. Constant (broken) FSD promises are fluff.

Features like a HUD or stalks on the steering wheel would make a driver's experience better and more comfortable. The former they never added, the latter they removed (probably to improve margin).

> Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff.

Quite the reverse, actually—it's an anti-safety feature.

The last EV I drove was a Renault Zoe, as they're available for hire from the street with an app.

It is a normal, small, city car. Windscreen wipers on the usual stalks, knobs and buttons for climate control, etc. In part because it lacks some electronic safety features (lane-departure warning, automatic emergency braking) it has a very poor safety rating.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Zoe

> Side glass that can withstand a steel bearing is fluff.

This one I actually think would have been somewhat useful, presuming it was cheap enough to actually use. I don't throw steel bearings at my car, but I would imagine that strength probably carries over to stuff falling out of trucks, rocks being flung by tires, etc.

It's not world-changing, but it would have been useful.

I’ve never had nor heard of anyone having an issue with a foreign object breaking a side window. Is it common?

Good luck when you drive into a lake and can't break your way out like that dead billionaire

Do you regularly drive your car into lakes? I would legitimately be surprised if I ever know a person that this has happened to never mind if it ever happened to me.

There was a wealthy lady that was driving drunk I believe in the news who put her Tesla into her pond by accident and drowned b/c she couldn't get the windows down and the doors to open. Her biggest problem was the alcohol though.

Friends could not save her b/c they could not break the laminated glass. We have safety hammers in all of our cars for that reason.

> Personally I think they're a distraction from the fact most cars today get the same horrible mileage they did 20 years ago.

You can't fight physics. A gas-powered sedan weighed down by all the modern safety requirements can only get ~43mpg on the highway.

A hybrid boosts this to ~55mpg and also greatly improves city efficiency.

Above those numbers, you're looking at engines that are severely underpowered (1.0 liters) or is more EV than gas car.

> I personally think it's because vehicle manufacturers have spent the last ~20 years not really improving the core vehicle at all, and instead convincing people that massage seats and car play are actually important.

Well, yes. To please the American consumerist mindset, you have to keep inventing new features even if the new feature is a complete gimmick or just a subscription, or taking out physical buttons (e.g. all strictly negatives).

> If someone made a car that was comfortable, easy to drive, had plenty of storage and was super cheap to drive (like 3l/100km / ~70 US MPG) I'd be all over it.

At that point why not just wish for a magic horse that flies or something. 70 MPG is an EV number. You'll never get a gas car that gets that mileage.

> A gas-powered sedan weighed down by all the modern safety requirements can only get ~43mpg on the highway.

Meanwhile in 1988 (36 years ago!) one could buy a Honda CRX that got 49mpg on the highway.

Weight is indeed the enemy here. To cut energy consumption and emissions we need to rethink the madness of 4000lb+ cars. I want to buy a 1600lb car with mindblowing mpg numbers using modern engine technology.

You can if the rest of the cars on the road were in the same weight class. Otherwise that's like going bowling with an egg.

Not 1600lb, but the lightest traditional ICE car I'm aware of is the Mitsubishi Mirage at 2106lbs.

The lotus elan is about 1500. The earlier honda insights are about 1850.

> 70 MPG is an EV number. You'll never get a gas car that gets that mileage.

My old 320d did those on the motorwaym and more sometimes. It wasn't the average, but given almost all my driving was motorway, it wasn't far off.

Diesel fuel contains more energy per gallon/Liter so that’s not a useful comparison.

Also if "motorway" implies Britain, Imperial gallons are 20% larger than US gallons.

It does! But then also I don't know what a gallon of electricity is.

https://ecomodder.com/forum/em-fuel-log.php?vehicleid=3158

https://ecomodder.com/forum/em-fuel-log.php?vehicleid=7982

I was driving a 2016 Ford Fiesta. Last year I decided it was too small for my family of three. I wanted an EV, and my needs focus on exactly the practical stuff you describe. I don't need a car that I can turn into a robotaxi or whatnot. I was incredibly disappointed by Tesla. I tried all the EVs at the DC auto show and it feels like all the legacy manufacturers have caught up with Tesla at every price point. I ended up buying a Bolt EUV. It's amazing how much comfort and capability I got per dollar spent. Much better than any Tesla.

No HUD. Auto sensing wipers that never actually sense when it’s raining. Lack of physical buttons. No way to keep the sun out of the car making it feel like a greenhouse. Much less A/C vents than other cars. Plastic horrible interiors. No road noise isolation. You have to share the only screen with the passenger.

They actually continuously deployed that wiper breaking update. My car in 2019 had wipers that worked.

That and the phone key never working, especially when it was raining and I was holding a child and groceries… that was it for me. Traded it in for a gas car. I’m not pumped about oil changes but at least the company won’t be able to remotely deploy bugs to my working car features

> Auto sensing wipers that never actually sense when it’s raining

I've never had auto sensing wipers, and am curious. Do they actually make enough of a difference to be worth the added hardware?

The manual wipers with controls on one of the steering column stalks in my car are so little effort to use that I usually am not even aware of it. I see rain on the windshield and then I see the wipers deal with it and have to infer that I must have started them because that is much more likely than someone surreptitiously install an after-market automatic wiper system.

It's one of those things that's kind of nice, but also generally unnecessary and I could easily live without, for the exact reason you mention. Manual wipers on a stalk are just right there next to your hand anyways, hardly an inconvenience when you need to use them.

About the only time auto wipers are handy is when you're driving through an area where the precipitation is highly inconsistent, torrential downpour one minute, a light sprinkle the next.

Of course, Tesla doubled down on their automatic wipers by removing the stalk. -_- In my 2019 Model 3, I can't change wiper behavior on the stalk, though there is a button on the end that if I press, it forces a single wipe, or continuously wipes if I hold the button. It also causes the display to show the wiper speed adjustment UI, and allows me to tilt one of the steering wheel controls to change the setting, so I don't HAVE to use the touch screen. But tbh, I'd still rather just have a stalk with a knob that sets the setting.

I’d say they are ok. But the problem with Tesla is that you either have the auto-sensing option or you have to go through the screen in the middle. The don’t have the stalk option.

They have a shortcut but still requires you to look at the screen in the middle. I don’t know how this car is considered safe

> Do they actually make enough of a difference to be worth the added hardware?

The hardware is super simple. Probably costs $5.

Most of those examples aren't the cars being outdated really. They were intentional decisions to either cut costs or two stubbornly do it their own way. A tech refresh wont give you radar because Elon didn't want radar. They could have had it years ago but didn't. Same with carplay and android auto. They wanted their software stack.

> They could have had it years ago but didn't.

They did have it years ago. That's the insult.

Elon is specifically removing features and trying to sell a worse car to people. Here we are nearly a decade later and people are seriously asking "what's wrong with a Tesla??"

Well, have yall seen what the Highland Refresh has ___removed___? That's my point, its a worse car now.

This is all valid, but I would say that their actual EV tech, ie battery management, charging network and efficiency is still best in class.

Of course now they've gutted this team perhaps that won't be the case for long

Reply on news.ycombinator.com