Slashdot Mirror


Tesla's New Model Y SUV Hits the Right Note By Playing It Safe (usatoday.com)

Last night, Tesla CEO Elon Musk unveiled the company's brand new electric SUV, the Model Y. The car is only slightly larger than the Model 3 and shares 75% of its parts, leaving many people wanting more. But, as USA Today reports, "The ho-hum reaction to Tesla's new electric SUV is, oddly enough, exactly what the company needs. [F]or a company that needs a little less pizzazz and a little more substance to make good on its promise to become a sustainable force in the auto industry, the Model Y hit the right marks." From the report: It's essentially a crossover version of the Tesla Model 3 compact car, bearing the design hallmarks of a hatchback and sharing the same architectural platform as its car sibling. That Tesla devotees weren't rewarded with sizzling new features on the Model Y illustrates that the company is getting serious about selling vehicles. After all, a compact SUV is precisely what Americans want: a driveable vehicle that puts safety first and flash second. Versions with five and seven seats will be available, with starting prices ranging from $39,000 for the base version to $60,000 for a performance model. If Musk had tried to break new technological barriers or adopt outlandish styling on the Model Y, he would have risked making the vehicle too difficult to manufacture and unappealing to conventional SUV buyers.

The first-available model will start at $47,000 and arrive in fall 2020. You can place a refundable deposit of $2,500 to secure your place in line when the vehicle becomes available. The base model of the Model Y -- the $39,000 version -- won't be available until "sometime in 2021," Musk said. Families can make the Model Y their primary vehicle since the battery range goes from 230 miles to 300 miles depending on the version. That stacks up well against other EVs on the market, such as the Chevrolet Bolt's 238 and the Hyundai Kona's 258. And while techies might not find the Model Y exhilarating, it will come equipped with software and sensors capable of autonomous driving, whenever it becomes legal. But buyers will have to pay for the system upgrade of $3,000 to $5,000.

142 comments

  1. Mythbusters are BACK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And them kids are gonna tear up Musk!

    1. Re:Mythbusters are BACK! by sexconker · · Score: 0

      Are you referring to this abortion? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8...

      Mythbusters Jr.? Including an A for Arts in STEM to make it STEAM and defeat the entire point?

    2. Re:Mythbusters are BACK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Including an A for Arts in STEM to make it STEAM and defeat the entire point?

      Yes, it does.

    3. Re:Mythbusters are BACK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And them kids are gonna tear up Musk!

      And in Slashdot tradition every single comment will be negative.

    4. Re: Mythbusters are BACK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly what the public wants so put a gas or Diesel engine in it to extend the range and it would be a hit!

    5. Re: Mythbusters are BACK! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just one question, Tesla Y?

  2. Autonomous driving by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 0

    it will come equipped with software and sensors capable of autonomous driving, whenever it becomes legal.

    You'd have to be a complete idiot to believe this at this point.

    --

    How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    1. Re:Autonomous driving by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      My guess is that once solid state lidar becomes cheap and small enough they will retrofit for people who already paid for full self driving, like they promised.

      They already have to retrofit the new revision 3 hardware to those older cars anyway.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Autonomous driving by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Velodyne promised $50 (in quantity) LIDAR back in 2017, they've since been to CES this year (in January) and showed off three new LIDAR products, but AFAICT they've made no public word on pricing. One of those products is a low-end device only suited to driver assistance, which is the only one of the three that could plausibly be that inexpensive, so that doesn't really fit the bill. And there's no sign it will happen this year.

      Do you really believe that they will make a retrofit, years later?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Autonomous driving by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      Tesla may have lied about the retrofit. They promised that anyone who bought Full Self Driving would get it if required... But they have since tried to redefined Full Self Driving as some level 2 driving aids.

      Still, if they don't people will sue them for the price they paid plus diminished value plus punitive damages.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Autonomous driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Velodyne never promised a $50 LIDAR. They were claiming the VLP-32C would be $500 in quantities of 1 million+

      And maybe it would be, but nobody is buying that quantity right now.

    5. Re:Autonomous driving by drinkypoo · · Score: 0
      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Autonomous driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fell for the PR. They announced a design, not a product.

    7. Re:Autonomous driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The software part is suspect because autonomous driving will almost certainly require software updates so it doesn't come "equipped" with it, but there's no reason to think that the hardware isn't sufficient. Humans seem to manage with only two cameras and no radar or ultrasonic sensors.

    8. Re:Autonomous driving by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      My guess is that once solid state lidar becomes cheap and small enough they will retrofit for people who already paid for full self driving, like they promised.

      They already have to retrofit the new revision 3 hardware to those older cars anyway.

      How will that help? It's the software that's not up to scratch. Putting in better hardware is not going to help at this point; the reasons for the car being unable to drive autonomously is not because the sensors don't see everything.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    9. Re:Autonomous driving by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It won't help... But if they ever do make it work, they have realized that they need significantly more computing power than is available in the current system.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re: Autonomous driving by Type44Q · · Score: 1
      Don't be stupid; people may be shorting TSLA on short-term basis; anyone actually investing has a long-term outlook and is smart enough not to sweat the dips but rather buy them.

      Now fuckoff; it's over for you losers.

    11. Re:Autonomous driving by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Completely agree. However, automated driving is awesome. That said, it will be decidedly not awesome if our cars start spying and tattling on us. What marginal safety (which I find unlikely, as it is) is not worth that.

    12. Re:Autonomous driving by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Improved sensory equipment would decrease some computational requirements. So would making the environment more "machine-readable", such as including RF signaling equipment on road signs and markings. And other cars, of course.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    13. Re:Autonomous driving by mrclevesque · · Score: 1

      "but if they ever do make it work, they have realized that they need significantly more computing power than is available in the current system."

      Yeah, and in the mean time you have to drive keeping your hands positioned on the steering wheel fully ready to take over from the so called self driving mode. Which is clearly not what the driver in the video is doing by placing both hands on the bottom of steering, placed close together and holding it lightly from underneath :

      https://youtu.be/knaskUXb12A?t...

  3. I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

    Far better to get a 410-mile range Rivian plug-in electric off road truck, with optional added 400 mile battery, with it's winch and design for rugged mountain and forest use. It's built in Michigan.

    But if you're city folk, and will rarely use it, go for the Tesla SUV.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I'm not a fan of the curved roof and rear door. Would have been much better as a hatchback.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not a fan of the curved roof and rear door

      Ditching that would mean about 25% less highway range, 25% longer charge times on road trips, and 80% the battery lifespan. Not worth the tradeoff.

      Would have been much better as a hatchback.

      It is a hatchback. Including a power liftgate.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    3. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's built in Michigan.

      It's not "built" anywhere. Rivian is a startup.

      Building a cost-effective mass production system is a hundred times more difficult than building a prototype or two and making some sleek marketing videos. Only one startup has succeeded at it in the US since Chrysler in 1925, and that's Tesla. Many have tried. All but one have failed.

      To be fair, Model Y isn't in mass production yet either. But it's certainly closer, not simply due to how many people have been working on it for how long, but in particular because it shares 76% of its hardware with the Model 3, which is already in mass production.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    4. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      Ditching that would mean about 25% less highway range, 25% longer charge times on road trips, and 80% the battery lifespan. Not worth the tradeoff.

      That's ridiculous. For example the Kona is not 25% less efficient than the Model 3. You would likely see a difference of 5-10 miles over the claimed 300 mile range.

      It is a hatchback. Including a power liftgate.

      Slightly different meaning here I think. The problem with that shape door is that it both lets rain water in and reduces the overall available height considerably. A vertical door would be much better.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

      Rivian will do very well, and despite being Tesla shareholder, if I ever wanted to own a car I would likely go that route. I am skeptical as to when Rivian will hit mass production, but they are led by a sharp CEO that has built a great team.

      At the same time, most of the market isn’t after an off-road vehicle— their most likely aspirations are to be able to get up a hill in the snow. The Model Y is well situated to serve that market.

    6. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Why do right-wingers always root against Tesla?

    7. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's ridiculous. For example the Kona is not 25% less efficient than the Model 3.

      https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=39836&id=40585

      Model 3 MPGe: 123
      Kona: 108

      123 / 108 = 14% difference... on top of the fact that Kona is also a smaller vehicle (if you disagree, you've clearly either never been inside a Model 3, been inside a Kona, or both; Kona's rear seat in particular is tiny). Leaf is closer, though still smaller in most internal passenger space measurements. It gets 97 MPGe highway, aka 27% more energy than the Model 3.

      I'll repeat: Aerodynamics is done for a reason. It makes a big difference in range, charge times, and cycle life.

      (Oh, and a note for the above: The average speed for said "highway" cycle is only about 55mph; the faster you go, the more streamlining matters)

      Slightly different meaning here I think. The problem with that shape door is that it both lets rain water in

      That's what gutters are for, as you'll find in every single car which has that form of hatch (which are numerous).

      and reduces the overall available height considerably.

      Which is why tapered vehicles are generally longer.

      If you want a "city car" that never goes at highway speeds, but length is a critical factor, then sure, have a truncated rear end. But if you want an EV that's suitable for road trips, you want taper.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    8. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Agreed, SUV is more on market. But if I'm teaching and researching in the mountains, and want to throw in some hunting and fishing and camping, it looks more my style.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    9. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 2

      Yeah, let's totally forget that they have 20% gross margins and had nearly a billion dollars free cash flow for each of the past two quarters, while most automakers gross margins on EVs are negative.

      Tesla's debt just *decreased* by nearly a billion dollars. Its debt to equity ratio is not high by automotive standards. Check out Ford's, for example.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    10. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      conservatism: commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation

      conservatism = status quo = Ford, GM, etc.

    11. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Slightly different meaning here I think. The problem with that shape door is that it both lets rain water in and reduces the overall available height considerably. A vertical door would be much better.

      Maybe that's the next vehicle. Anyway, we used to call these fastbacks, although those were generally 2 or 2+2 seaters. I miss my Nissan 240SX fastback badly. It could carry surprisingly large items, and it handled better than really anything else Japanese of its day except for the NSX. You had to get into something German or Italian to do better otherwise. But it also got 30 MPG on the freeway on normal tires back in '89, and at least some of that was due to its profile. It had pop-up headlights, and optionally, a fastback.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the fictional 20% margin that has zero basis in reality? Tesla has never turned a profit in their entire existence. They will be bankrupt by the end of the year.

    13. Re: I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only one startup has succeeded at it in the US since Chrysler in 1925, and that's Tesla. Many have tried. All but one have failed.

      You mean dozens have been murdered, from Tucker to Kaiser.

    14. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I'm not a "right-winger". I don't root against Tesla. I'd like for them to succeed. But they're still way out of their depth.

      I do root against Elon Musk. He's a piece of shit and a con man in my book.

    15. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      This is just a Model 3, inflated like a balloon...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    16. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 0

      The Model 3 is much smaller than the Kona though.

      Please let me know which of the two you've never been in before, because clearly it's either one, the other, or both.

      Leg room, front (inches): 42,7 vs. 41,5
      Leg room, rear (inches): 35,2 vs. 33,4
      Head room, front (inches): 40,3 vs. 39,6
      Head room, rear (inches): 37,7 vs. 37,6
      Shoulder room, front (inches): 56,3 vs. 55,5
      Shoulder room, rear (inches): 54 vs. 54,5
      Hip room, front (inches): 53,4 vs. 53,3
      Hip room, rear (inches): 52,4 vs. 52,2

      There is literally only one passenger room measure - rear shoulder room - where the Kona exceeds Model 3. And IMHO, the subjective difference is a lot greater than the numbers look. I guess having two inches cut off your leg space is more dramatic than it sounds because you can't just shrink your legs by two inches.

      And of course you selected the most favourable conditions for your favourite car, where as if you use the headline figure of 120MPGe for the Kona and 130MPGe for the M3 (from your own link) it's down to about 7%.

      I chose the most meaningful figure - highway efficiency. Because range and charging rates only matters in highway driving. Sure, you could compare city efficiency, but given that UDDS's average speed is 18,6 mph, try dividing a couple hundred miles range by 18,6 mph and look at how long you'd have to spend in your car to actually run it out of range. Aka, it's irrelevant. The comparison is between highway consumptions, aka, where you can actually run your car out of charge and where you have to actually stop at fast chargers.

      Also if we are talking about rear space, because of that sloping roof the rear seats in the Model Y are only really suitable for children.

      Are you forgetting that that's the third row in the car? Are you wanting to compare it to cars that only have two rows?

      Also don't forget that for the same price the Kona has a 35% larger battery, resulting in considerably better range

      Except that it doesn't get significantly better range - that's the whole point! 35% bigger battery (added weight (which hurts handling), added production cost, added environmental impact, etc), but only 17% more range, despite smaller passenger space by virtually every measure. And that efficiency difference, it must be reiterated, means slower charging (more kWh needed to go a given amount of distance), something that is compounded by the fact that Kona can only charge at up to a theoretical 100kW (up to ~70kW on most high power CCS stations, and 40-45kW on the vastly more common 50kW stations), while Model 3 charges at up 250kW on the new V3 stations, and up to 145kW on the current V2 stations.

      And as for the whole "for the same price" aspect, it's $36,5k base price vs. $35k... except that Hyundai openly admits that they make no profit on their EVs, while Tesla does, including on the $35k version (and at the average sale price, about 20% gross margins). Secondly, that's not the appropriate matchup; Tesla has a $37k trim, which is much closer to the base Kona price... but that one goes an extra 20 miles and comes with the partial premium interior, while the Kona is in its lowest trim.

      And even most Kona fans are willing to face up that the interior on the Kona is decked out like an econobox; even the Bolt's interior is nicer than the Kona's, and that's not saying much (though Kona's seats are nicer than the Bolts, and it comes with a lot more tech than the Bolt). Meanwhile even the base trim Model 3 has an all-glass roof (with the cool rainbow water effect), mostly wrapped trims rather than simply pressed, etc etc. The standard feature comparison isn't even close (it would take a long time to go down the whole list!)

      Yes, shame they don't work v

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    17. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 1

      TESLA CAN'T BE PROFITABLE!
      (Tesla turns a profit)
      FREAK INCIDENT, I DON'T BELIEVE IT!
      (Tesla turns a profit again)
      LIES! ALL LIES!

      I think there's a fable about this somewhere...

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    18. Re: I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Only one startup has succeeded at it in the US since Chrysler in 1925, and that's Tesla. Many have tried. All but one have failed.

      You mean dozens have been murdered, from Tucker to Kaiser.

      And there's been plenty assassination attempts on Tesla and there will be on Rivian too, if they make it that far. Remember that Tesla started with the Roadster in 2008, the Model 3 is their 4th generation car with 10 years of experience. A newcomer now will have to get a lot of things right on the first try to not flop.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    19. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They magically "turned a profit" on paper in Q3 by eliminating capex and other book-cookery. Capex, you know Capital Expenditures. That thing they'll need to build that new factory and new vehicle. There is no way they can produce the M3 in any meaningful quantities now much less the Y. Demand has fallen off a cliff too.

      Sorry Rei, you've lost. If you're still holding TSLA stock at this point you have no one to blame but yourself.

    20. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Rei · · Score: 1

      So Q3 was bookwork magic.
      Q4 then? More magic?
      As for capex, have you not noticed that they've built an entire new huge building at Lathrop and are building a whole new Gigafactory, among other things?

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    21. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      It is an SUV not a hatchback. Even Teslarati proclaims it an SUV. And it's curved roof and door compromise it's role as an SUV. Apparently, based on your statement, because of battery constraints. So better to make it a poor SUV, than come out with something that does 225 miles - but has a usable interior (in terms of square shape). Better to do a BMW X6-style body that is universally derided as useless - poor for a car, and unusable as an SUV.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    22. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      That market is starting to really heat up, the choices are growing fast, take your pick, https://cars.usnews.com/cars-t... or https://www.tomsguide.com/us/p... or https://www.edmunds.com/electr....

      The electric midsize SUV is the market place to be, both as buyer and seller and it is rapidly becoming much more competitive.

      Now there is a real gamble in there, how long to hold onto your infernal combustion engine. As more electrics entire the market, so the prices will drop but as more electric vehicles enter the market so the resale of your infernal combustion engine will drop. So how long to hold on and when to sell, because that infernal combustion engine price drop will tend to be quite precipitous at the end.

      Choose and perish, one way or the other, pay too much for the electric or lose too much on your old gas guzzler. Keep in mind people will be able to fill their electric tax free, from their home solar battery power system, so yeah, when the market goes into full speed, your gas guzzler investment is dead.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    23. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Jeremi · · Score: 2

      This is just a Model 3, inflated like a balloon...

      I prefer to think of it as the Model X, Tom Brady Edition.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    24. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey retard. Tesla’s has NEVER turned a profit.

    25. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      You win the Intarwebs for the day!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    26. Re: I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that what your Marxist know nothing professors put in your little brain?

      Do you even know any conservatives? No. You do not. Your crotchety racist 95 year old blind and senile great grandpappy does not count.

    27. Re: I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are building two new huge tents I mean buildings without massively increasing capex while simultaneously building a zillion new model Ys AND they will have full level 5 autonomous vehicles by 12/31/2019.

      Sure. Right. And I shit rainbows.

    28. Re: I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are pie in the sky sci-fi delusional.

      What solar system was that I paid how much for to power my Tesla Model Random Alphanumeric?

      You also know nothing about the used car market. Totally different type of buyers than your over priced electric toy buyers. Price up front, year and mileage are the ONLY determinants of a used car price. Options, color, engine type etc etc etc mean almost nothing.

      You might as well say we should all sell our land bound cars because FLYING CARS ARE ALMOST HERE! We will get flying cars the week after Musk gives us truly autonomous true self driving level 5 cars. Which is to say about a week after NEVER.

      ICE cars will be the majority of all cars sold for at least the next 10-15 years.

    29. Re: I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ahh, Slashdot's favorite shill is back!

    30. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      But if you're city folk, and will rarely use it, go for the Tesla SUV.

      Quite. The closest that about 99% of city SUVs get to going off-road is running over the flowerbed in the private school carpark. City SUVs are stupid vehicles. They're not designed to go off-road. They're designed to look macho to people whoss ego is too fragile to drive a minivan.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    31. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You are just being obtuse now. Obviously I don't mean the internal space, as that has nothing to do with efficiency. Are you denying that the Kona is significantly taller than the Model 3, or that it has better EPA rated range?

      BTW, Tesla also admits that it is losing money right now... oh, except Hyundai didn't say it isn't making money at all. That's not what the quote said, is it?

      Come on Rei. The Model 3 is a good car, no need to get insecure and start lying about it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do faggots root for Tesla?

      Why would a faggot root for a vehicle that has not tailpipe?

    33. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      Would have been much better as a hatchback.

      It is a hatchback. Including a power liftgate.

      That being said, I'd like to see them make a hot hatch. Or a smaller wagon. Similar to how WRX used to have a wagon form. I always found hatchbacks deceptively good at moving a lot of stuff. I really miss the little 2 seater hatchback that I used to have (I've moved 2 times in the past year, and will be moving again in the next month)

    34. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      This is just a Model 3, inflated like a balloon...

      This has how I've felt about most car designs for the past 10-15ish years? I really miss some of the looks from back in the 90s.

    35. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fElon musk is absolutely a con man, fraud POS worthless sack of shit human being. Needs to go to prison. He's just running a series of government-subsidized ponzi schemes that will all crash down. It's only urban myth that he is "smart" or "genius", the reality he is just a snake-oil-salesman, wolf-in-sheeps clothing, promising to change the world, when all he really does is relocate emissions to a coal power plant, and create a bunch of snobby elitists smuggy smuggersons that think driving an $85k electric car with underwhelming tech will change one thing about the climate. Complete moron and fraud. Can't wait to see him in prison.

    36. Re:I'd rather get a Rivian for the same price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditching that would mean about 25% less highway range, 25% longer charge times on road trips, and 80% the battery lifespan. .

      No you fucking dummy. Aerodynamics do not affect charge times. It means you must recharge more often. An EV with 200% better aerodynamics will NOT recharge faster.

  4. A few concerns there by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    I also like the sound of the Rivian.

    However, it is (A) somewhat expensive, (B) the company has no track record yet producing anything, and (C) not sure it will offer a self-driving option.

    The Rivian looks way more properly built for offload use than the Y though, for sure. And 400 miles range is great (assuming it really gets that range). I especially like the suspension...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:A few concerns there by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      The Rivian looks way more properly built for offload use than the Y though, for sure.

      The Y is not built for off-road at all. OK, maybe on a lawn. I would buy a Rivian, it is getting back to the essentials of a 4x4.

    2. Re:A few concerns there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a compact SUV. The target market is suburban wine mums. Nobody expects to take it off road.

    3. Re: A few concerns there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SUVs are mainly bought by the elderly.

    4. Re:A few concerns there by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      The Y is not built for off-road at all. OK, maybe on a lawn.

      It could handle most forest roads OK. I've taken less capable cars on those kinds of roads, they are OK if you are careful.

      I would buy a Rivian, it is getting back to the essentials of a 4x4.

      On paper it seems like that, but can they really deliver even at the high price already stated? At 60k you have a lot of very impressive 4x4 options. Electric is already kind of a negative in a lot of places you might take a vehicle like that, I like to explore Utah and I'm not sure how close we are to having the be practical for electric cars even if you stick to roads... even with the 400 mile range, you are going to be needing to re-charge mid day with much travel.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:A few concerns there by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      I also like the sound of the Rivian.

      However, it is (A) somewhat expensive, (B) the company has no track record yet producing anything, and (C) not sure it will offer a self-driving option.

      The Rivian looks way more properly built for offload use than the Y though, for sure. And 400 miles range is great (assuming it really gets that range). I especially like the suspension...

      In the face of all evidence to the contrary, you appear to be under the impression that self-driving is solvable in a small timeframe.

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  5. Based on Tesla's track record by phalse+phace · · Score: 1

    The first-available model will start at $47,000 and arrive in fall 2020. You can place a refundable deposit of $2,500 to secure your place in line when the vehicle becomes available. The base model of the Model Y -- the $39,000 version -- won't be available until "sometime in 2021," Musk said.

    Based on Tesla's track record, that means the first-available $47,000 model will arrive in Spring 2021, while the based $39,000 version won't be available until sometime in late 2021 or early 2022.

    1. Re:Based on Tesla's track record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, the doors and bumpers will fall off routinely and they'll be building them in tents, but anyone who scoffs at that "isn't a serious buyer"

    2. Re:Based on Tesla's track record by sexconker · · Score: 1

      They're rigid fabric structures, not tents!!!!

      -Rei

    3. Re: Based on Tesla's track record by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it won't be on sale in Europe until three years later, starting somewhere around € 65k.

  6. Dissappointed by 89cents · · Score: 1

    This is the form factor I wanted - a taller Model 3 with a hatchback. However just like the Model 3, it has no dash, most controls are menus on the screen, unintuitive door handles, too pricey and only manufacturing the more expensive models first, got to wait another 1.5 - 2 years.
    I was excited to see the Model 3 on the road initially, but now I am sick of seeing them. They could have at least tried to given the Model Y some unique design styling.
    In 2020, there will be much more competition in the electric vehicle market. I'd prefer a charging port mounted around the front of the vehicle, no tracking, and an actual real dash with controls + a big screen. We'll see.

    1. Re:Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They flopped with this one. A serious case of failure to manage expectations.

      An underwhelming pseudo SUV at that price point is going to be a disaster for them.

    2. Re:Dissappointed by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Hasn't anyone got the Model 3 diagnostic port sussed out yet? Not that I'm in the market for a new vehicle, I wouldn't buy a vehicle that didn't offer me diagnostic access. If you had that, you could do your own instrument console.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It’s illegal to repair a Tesla by yourself.

    4. Re:Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      jack rickard on youtube is working on it.

    5. Re:Dissappointed by Rei · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is, you probably actually believe this.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    6. Re: Dissappointed by Code+Herder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      To each his own, I have a model 3 and I find it so weird when I have to use an old style car like my wifes volt with all the buttons and the tiny display. I liken physical dash buttons to blackberries vs iphone soft keyboards when it came out. A lot of people here bitched and moaned about it but in the end people voted with their wallet and like me they preferes the softkeyboard.

      I think this will be similar, its a trade off but I like the pros more than the cons.

    7. Re:Dissappointed by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      things you need will be blocked at the CAN/LIN gateway.

      if not now, then later on.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    8. Re:Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Show me where I can legally buy a Tesla scan tool? I can buy a legal scan tool for real cars. But show me where I can buy a scan tool so I can do routine stuff like bleed the brake lines. Program TPSM modules. Or just read diagnostic codes.

      You can’t because it’s fucking illegal.

    9. Re: Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot. Tactile buttons in a CAR (where space isn't really an issue) are 100% better. Of course, most of the world are idiots and they can upcharge for a stupid smart display, so it will indeed probably go that way.

    10. Re:Dissappointed by rl117 · · Score: 1

      You own it. It's your property. It's it not illegal to work on your own property to effect a repair.

      They might not want you to do that. They might not publish the information for you to do that. It might invalidate an agreement like a warranty or service plan. But it's yours to do with as you wish.

    11. Re:Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don’t own a Tesla. They can brick the computer anytime they want. And when they go bankrupt your overpriced golf cart will become an overpriced brick.

    12. Re: Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iâ(TM)m curious if you live where winter is cold? With my current car I can drive and work the controls with gloves on. Real gloves, too, not ultra-thin âoeworks with a touchscreenâ gloves that provide no warmth.

    13. Re:Dissappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm hoping that Honda will sell their urban EV in all markets in the US. An all electric coupe with rear wheel drive and updated but classic styling, plus Honda levels of usability, reliability and resale. If they can pull it off, the Model 3/Y will not be long for this world.

  7. So where is the SUV? by Fly+Swatter · · Score: 1

    What I see looks more like a VW Beetle knockoff.

    1. Re:So where is the SUV? by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure it's a 4 passenger car, let alone capable of 7.

    2. Re:So where is the SUV? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      I wondered that too. It's hard to tell from the photos I've seen, since there haven't been any humans in there for scale... but this doesn't look large enough to be considered even a smaller SUV; e.g. a Hyundai Santa Fe.

      Nice to see the prices coming down somewhat, though. I'd never spend 40K on a car, but I know a lot of people do.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:So where is the SUV? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Okay, now I've watched the video where Musk introduced it. How the heck is that an SUV? Was the tiny Accord Hatchback I remember from the 1980s also an SUV?

      And how are they gonna get seven people crammed into that thing? Unless they're clowns, of course...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    4. Re:So where is the SUV? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
      Electric car, skateboard floor plan is surprisingly roomy. There is no engine, radiator, transmission. The electric motor is no bigger than the differential. The battery is just a thick floor.

      X does not look all that bigger than S, but it is very very spacious.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    5. Re:So where is the SUV? by Rei · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You do realize that there were people taking rides in it all evening, right? Were they in on the conspiracy?

      Heard from a six foot guy who was in the back. Fit comfortably, although he did hit is head when they went over a speedbump. Probably only best for average height or short adults back there.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    6. Re:So where is the SUV? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      You do realize that there were people taking rides in it all evening, right? Were they in on the conspiracy?

      You need to cut back on the caffeine, man.

      “Conspiracy”? Seriously? It was a simple question. How does that qualify as an SUV?

      I will note that the other responder to my post actually gave a somewhat reasonable explanation - at least that it might be roomier inside than one might imagine from the size. But still, referring to it as an SUV seems like marketing-speak.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    7. Re:So where is the SUV? by Rei · · Score: 1

      It's a 7-seater crossover with 1,9 cubic meters of cargo space with the rear seats down.

      If you want to complain about something being called a "SUV", look at the Hyundai Kona ;)

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    8. Re:So where is the SUV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not physically possible for 7 people to fit into what the showed last night. No serious person saw that jump seat and believes it's real. That's one of the reasons the stock tanked today and now there's nothing left to pump. Musk is a con-artist of the highest order. Give it up already.

    9. Re:So where is the SUV? by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      The Hyundai Kona is $19,000.

      You can buy very well equipped mid-sized SUVs from Honda, Subaru, Hyundai, and so on that have near-vertical rear doors and 2.5 cubic meters of cargo space for under $40k.

      From a sales perspective, I think Telsa is fooling themselves they can seriously call this the kind of SUV they claim it to be, especially at that price point.

      Just call it a luxury compact crossover already.

  8. What makes you say that? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    You'd have to be a complete idiot to believe this at this point.

    So do you have a real reason for saying that?

    There's no reason to think Tesla cannot deliver full self driving at some point in the future. They are basically already for a lot of simple cases. so what leads you to conclude it's not possible for them to evolve what they have until it handles pretty much any case?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:What makes you say that? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 4, Insightful

      so what leads you to conclude it's not possible for them to evolve what they have until it handles pretty much any case?

      Hate and short positions.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:What makes you say that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because if this car doesn't bring anything new to the table vs the Model 3 we know the does not have adequate sensors nor processing power required.

    3. Re:What makes you say that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sure, if some point in the future is two decades. "Full self driving" includes all the edge cases. It's a thousand times more difficult than what Tesla is doing now.

    4. Re:What makes you say that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep.
      30 years of programming experience tells me that the software will be compelely rewritten at least three more times to make the last few bits work properly.

    5. Re:What makes you say that? by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      There's no reason to think Tesla cannot deliver full self driving at some point in the future

      Yes there is. Nobody will be able to deliver full self-driving on all roads in the timeframe where the original purchasers still own these cars.

    6. Re:What makes you say that? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      They started selling autopilot over 4 years ago - and still haven't come close to delivering. What makes you think they can deliver it at some point in the future? Most companies don't announce vaporware 5+ years in advance...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    7. Re:What makes you say that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Most companies don't announce vaporware 5+ years in advance"

      You must not be a gamer

  9. Google wants me to download all videos by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I can no longer watch youtube with an ad-blocker on. But youtube-dl still works, so I just download everything before I watch it. What a bunch of tools.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re: Google wants me to download all videos by Code+Herder · · Score: 1

      I think you should explore other ad blockers. Even on my iphone I can block youtube ads (when using safari).

  10. Will be interesting to see.... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    All the news sites seem to be in agreement that because this is a Crossover type SUV, which is the big seller in the market right now, that this is going to do great.

    The problem I see from the perspective of almost every Tesla owner I've spoken to about is .... none of them are impressed by the styling or anything else about it.

    That tells me that yes, this really is a Tesla aimed at the "average consumer" who may have never considered one before, or didn't pay a lot of attention to them until now. That's fine, IF enough of those people turn out to want to try an EV version of a CUV at a $40-60K price-point. This is NOT really a vehicle that existing Tesla owners or fans will probably buy in any great numbers.

    I mean, they already just sold a lot of Model 3 sedans to the Tesla-faithful, and this Model Y is so similar to one of those, you'd almost mistake one for the other at first glance. It's a slight bit taller, but exact same headlights, front grille design, and overall shape. Not even so much as new paint colors. I think the people who could afford them and were earlier adopters largely forked out the money for a Model X if they wanted an SUV, and they're rewarded for that cost with a bigger, roomier vehicle that has a far superior dashboard design. (And sure, you get the cool gull-wing rear doors too.)

    Oddly too, depending on configuration -- there are people who paid about $5K more for their Model 3 than the same configuration claims it will cost on a Model Y. Maybe that will help some of them resell their slightly used 3 to move to a new Y if they want something like those extra seats for 7 passengers? But again, I bet this is really only a small sub-set of owners.

    1. Re:Will be interesting to see.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Saw a Model Y in a showroom and it didn't look similar to the Model 3. Dad will probably prefer the Model 3 and the wife and kids will probably prefer the Model Y.

    2. Re:Will be interesting to see.... by jeff4747 · · Score: 2

      This is NOT really a vehicle that existing Tesla owners or fans will probably buy in any great numbers.

      Isn't that a good thing?

      If your current customers are satisfied with the current models, isn't it good to release a new model that appeals to different customers?

    3. Re:Will be interesting to see.... by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      More expensive than a Model 3, but less range and acceleration, more homely looking. . But it has a hatch back! . Clearly this is the perfect car and will crush the 3 in sales.

    4. Re:Will be interesting to see.... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      Not really..... I mean, yes, it's good to appeal to a broader customer base. But I think so far, Tesla has gotten where they are mostly through loyal fans. (You know ... same way Apple built the company off of the historical 8% or so of the personal computer buying market who just loved everything they put out?)

      If they alienate the existing owners now, that means a lot of people who bought a car from them back in 2012-2015 or so .... That's enough time so a lot of folks are ready to do a trade-in for something new.

  11. Re:queue the panicing shorts and Russian/Texan tro by nukenerd · · Score: 1

    Those Russian/Texan trolls are not able to hide their anti-Tesla manipulation

    I'm a Russian or a Texan then. An interesting concept - being from the UK I get these stereotype images of a ten-gallon stetson or a fur hat.

  12. 19Q1 is going to be ugly. But already priced by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Indications are US pent up demand is gone. Europe sales did not begin well in time. Took too much time in getting European certificates etc. Too much of inventory in transit. So 19Q1 is going to be ugly. But that news is already baked into the price.

    Long term situation looks decent. Though the pent up demand is gone, the base model will sell well. That will help with economy of scale. It is believed base model gross margin is not 20%. But it is not negative either. With all those slash and burn cost cutting the Q1 results will not be that bad.

    Come 19Q2, the 750 million dollar loss 18Q2 will roll off the trailing four quarter view. So Tesla might make be profitable and will be included in SP500. That will bring much needed price support due to index fund buying. By that time world wide pent up demand will be gone. But base model will have margins in 10% range and the company will be able chugg along.

    Demand will pick up for the model 3 in later half of the year. Tesla has not done leasing, advertising, fleet sales etc. It should be able to easily sell 350K model 3s world wide with an average sales price of around 40K.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  13. The hype and the ad don't add up. by az-saguaro · · Score: 1

    I don't get it. I can appreciate what the report says, that Tesla did not over extend itself or go too wild with new features and design. But to call it an SUV seems like pure marketing BS. They make a few mods on their base model and call it whatever they want to capture so and so market. They could call it a mini big rig or a suburban war tank, but that don't make it so. Take a look at the thing at https://www.tesla.com/modely. It is a small hatchback coupe that looks like my Honda did in the 1980's. Others in this thread have likened it to a VW beetle. If you got a Hot Wheels or Tonka Toy that looks like a Suburban or 4-Runner, and put a little battery and motor in it, that would be more of an SUV than that thing.

    The site says:
    "Model Y provides maximum versatility—able to carry 7 passengers and their cargo. Each second row seat folds flat independently, creating flexible storage for skis, furniture, luggage and more."
    Granted, you have to see it in person to know for sure. But to look at the pictures, 7 people would be a huge squeeze. Furniture? A foot stool maybe. Doesn't seem like enough room for much camping gear, a surfboard, or lumberyard or garden store purchases. Sorry you say, surfboards go on the roof, but that curved hatchback ain't got no place to put a roof rack.

    Site says:
    "Model Y is capable in rain, snow, mud and off-road."
    Off road? Sure, if pulling into your drive is off road. For that wilderness adventure, you can drive on your lawn.
    Off road usually implies an alternative suspension - maybe they do, maybe they don't - but there is no clearance. Low center of gravity, as they claim, means your butt won't clear a sidewalk curb let alone rock and rubble mountain trails. Want to try a rainy wash?, wear your swim trunks and snorkel.

    It's a hatchback, with a few interior seating mods so they can make you think "I bought an SUV" ... if you are an urban yuppie ... who has never driven through a ranch or a back country road.

    And here's the other odd thing.
    Site says:
    "And when you’re on the road, it’s easy to plug in along the way—at any public station or with the Tesla charging network. We currently have over 12,000 Superchargers worldwide, with six new locations opening every week."
    Six new locations a week?
    Let's do the math.
    6x50 weeks = 300 chargers per year.
    At that rate, 12,000 units means they have invested 40 years in infrastructure build out, but we know that that is not the case. So, they put in a lot quickly in just a few years, and now they are lollygagging their way through. 300 units a year worldwide means that market self sustainability for electric vehicles will never happen. Maybe the ad got the numbers wrong. 600 a week would make sense, not 6.

    Anyone else think that this ad is missing a few screws?
    Any chance the vehicles themselves are missing a few screws?

    1. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      It's a hatchback, with a few interior seating mods so they can make you think "I bought an SUV" ... if you are an urban yuppie ... who has never driven through a ranch or a back country road.

      Just like every other manufacturer's Crossover "SUV".

    2. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2
      Every mile for a gasoline car comes from the gas station. For an electric car 90% of the miles come from an outlet in your home. You need to buy 10 times fewer miles off home. In the BEV universe, every outlet is a gas station!. All the 240 v outlets in camp grounds, hotels.. all are like gas stations.

      6 a week is plenty. It is exclusive to Tesla, anyway. For a 500K a year production rate this is good enough.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    3. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by Rei · · Score: 1

      The site says:
      Granted, you have to see it in person to know for sure. But to look at the pictures, 7 people would be a huge squeeze.

      Were the people doing test rides in on the conspiracy?

      Furniture? A foot stool maybe.

      66 cubic feet / 1900 litres / 1,9 cubic meters with the rear seats down. A little less than a RAV4.

      I think what throws people off is that it's almost the exact same shape as the 3, just scaled up (it shares 76% of its hardware with the 3 for ease of production - hence the similarity).

      Sorry you say, surfboards go on the roof, but that curved hatchback ain't got no place to put a roof rack.

      *Cough*

      Off road? Sure, if pulling into your drive is off road. For that wilderness adventure, you can drive on your lawn.

      Actually, you're right in this one. While it has more clearance than the 3 (Model 3 = 5,5" / 14cm), as well as AWD, I wouldn't recommend offroading in it. Again, it's built basically the same as the 3, which is not designed for offroading.

      Of course, all crossover makers try to present them as being capable of going offroad, even though they know that their main market is suburban housewives.

      Low center of gravity, as they claim, means your butt won't clear a sidewalk curb let alone rock and rubble mountain trails

      That's not how it works. An EV with a 14" / 36cm ground clearance would still have a lower centre of gravity than an ICE vehicle with a 4" / 10cm ground clearance. It's because the battery pack is under the floor, versus the engine in an ICE whose centre of mass is closer to the vertical centre of the vehicle. EVs act like weebles.

      Want to try a rainy wash?, wear your swim trunks and snorkel.

      I have no clue what you're talking about. Do you think EVs can't take water? If so, think again.

      "And when you’re on the road, it’s easy to plug in along the way—at any public station or with the Tesla charging network. We currently have over 12,000 Superchargers worldwide, with six new locations opening every week."
      Six new locations a week?
      Let's do the math.
      6x50 weeks = 300 chargers per year.
      At that rate, 12,000 units means they have invested 40 years in infrastructure build out, but we know that that is not the case.

      Your math is wrong, but your misunderstanding is understandable. Chargers != locations. This should clear things up. (chargers = stalls, locations = supercharger stations)

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    4. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "66 cubic feet / 1900 litres / 1,9 cubic meters with the rear seats down."

      Only if you continue to blindly believe a pathological liar like Musk. There are dozens of amateur imagery showing the Y overlain on top of an M3 - it's essentially the same vehicle raised a bit. That 66 cubic feet number is not physically possible.

    5. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Y is a 5-door hatchback. An SUV is built on a ladder frame, has skid plates, and a full size spare. There should be enough room to put on mud terrain tires.

    6. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a small hatchback coupe that looks like my Honda did in the 1980's

      ..which would actually be very cool, if it didn't cost forty thousand dollars!! 40k for a basic car? Fuck that, get it down to 15k and I'll buy one. All these vehicles cost too much. Way too much.

    7. Re:The hype and the ad don't add up. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Model Y is capable in rain, snow, mud and off-road."
      Off road? Sure, if pulling into your drive is off road. For that wilderness adventure, you can drive on your lawn.

      While I agree with you on every level on this point, every automaker talks the same crap about their tall sedans and wagons, er I mean crossovers. They're just talking about dirt driveways, and grass lawns. With that said, EVs tend to have exemplary traction control, which is handy in those scenarios.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  14. missing the mark by Iamthecheese · · Score: 1

    a compact SUV is precisely what Americans want: a driveable vehicle that puts safety first and flash second.
    Essentially a station wagon, this is exactly what I want. But it still misses the mark. High on my list of priorities is a car that won't track my location via GPS at all times. Until I can have privacy and a Tesla at the same time, I won't be getting the Tesla.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  15. Major Fail - no wonder the stock took a hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ho hum. Another more expensive variant of the Model 3 because they cannot do what they promised -- to manufacture a cheaper EV. All smoke and mirrors and 'give us $2500 now and in a couple of years you can pay $47K+ for something fewer people will want then'. Maybe Tesla should have a program that just switches your deposit to the newest announced product automatically -- for only a mere $1K per year. That's what it amounts too. They've got a pile of people who want to give them a pile of money, but they cannot deliver product. The window is closing...

    1. Re:Major Fail - no wonder the stock took a hit by Rei · · Score: 2

      because they cannot do what they promised -- to manufacture a cheaper EV.

      You do realize that they do sell the $35k model, right? And that they actually made it nicer than was promised, with some of the things that were supposed to be optional extras included standard?

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    2. Re:Major Fail - no wonder the stock took a hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. The $35k is excluding tax and only in the US. It's almost double that if you were to actually buy one today in Europe.

    3. Re:Major Fail - no wonder the stock took a hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they don't. $42k is not $35k. It's only $35 after imagining fuel savings and including a tax break that's going away in a few months.

    4. Re:Major Fail - no wonder the stock took a hit by Zobeid · · Score: 1

      Not true. Go configure one on Tesla's website. The base model with no options is $35,000 before savings. If you include the "imagined" fuel savings (an estimate — but yes, electricity really is cheaper than gasoline) and the tax break that's going away in a few months (but hasn't yet!), then the result is $26,950.

  16. Why so ugly? by dwater · · Score: 1

    Why do they keep making them look like boats with snooty noses (reminds me of the maître d' from Ferris Beuler's day off).

    --
    Max.
    1. Re:Why so ugly? by Rei · · Score: 1

      I love the look, but I love aerodynamics.

      And that is, BTW, the answer - aerodynamics.

      --
      If I ever become wealthy and mad, I'll leave Companion Cubes on desert islands for shipwreck survivors.
    2. Re:Why so ugly? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Style. Brands have distinct style. Some go off the rails (seriously Honda it's a city car not a futuristic battle tank), and some never had any to begin with https://www.google.com/search?...

    3. Re:Why so ugly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aerodynamics, with a flat front

      brillant

  17. Not about safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, a compact SUV is precisely what Americans want: a driveable vehicle that puts safety first and flash second.

    No, they want something big to impress the neighbors. If they wanted driveability and safety, they'd be buying mid-size sedans.

  18. Re:queue the panicing shorts and Russian/Texan tro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh god, not the tweed!

  19. Just another re-labelled car like most... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of the garbage car companies are selling under the label "SUV" these days.

    It's not a Jeep, a Land Rover, etc. It appears to be another little car that's smaller and less powerful than most normal cars of the 1970s, and lacks the [at least marginally] higner clearance and ruggedness of what would expect for that label. Musk *should* have rolled out something that looked Jeep-ish, sort of similar to some of the cool Jeep concept vehicles of past auto shows.

    [sigh]

    If you're gonna roll out an "SUV", the damned thing ought to at least LOOK like it even if it cannot act like it. Major lost opportunity given that some of the stuff people want in an SUV could actually be made better with electric power and a drive train that put a motor in each wheel, ditching the drive shaft and axels.

  20. Pretty nice for a crossover by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see tons of stupid "tall cars". I don't understand why people want the rugged offroad styling but are willing to accept what is essentially just a tall car, but I'm not the target market. My favorite vehicle went out of production years ago and gets under 20 mpg at best. It'll go places these CUVs never will though.

    Back when the term SUV was invented I always wondered why those people didn't just buy station wagons. They never even go down a dirt road, let alone offroad.

    Anyway, if a tree fell on my old truck and I had to replace it but there were no other options than CUVs... then I'd consider this new thing. It doesn't look a whole lot worse than a Rogue or CR-V, and more importantly it really doesn't cost significantly more when you look at long term.

  21. Musk pivot on to "Y" by ElitistWhiner · · Score: 1

    Tesla telecast a parade of American ingenuity, model after model. Finally model "Y" entered on stage; behold a Tesla launch vehicle for the foreign market space. A model designed for smaller roads, built for smaller budgets and engineered for the future. Tesla's smarter approach separates model "Y" from its other big American Dream models by moving on. Model "Y" can solve the last man problem how to provide affordable, energy neutral transportation down to the last man. Great pivot!

    UK,EU,CH,NZ,RU et. al. are GIGA plotting factories in the future.