None of that is why Tesla was ahead of everyone for so long.
It's because their cars have better range, and Tesla is still the range leader. They held four of the top six spots in 2022, and the number one is the Lucid Air (only 3k of them have actually been sold):
https://www.caranddriver.com/shopping-advice/g32634624/ev-lo...
Also, I just want to say I am categorically not an Elon or Tesla fanboi and I am rooting for other brands to meet and exceed their range performance.
I say this as someone who owns an electric car by a different manufacturer.
In the US.
And the US drives these crazy valuations.
This isn't a defensible position though for Tesla. New charging networks are coming online at a furious rate. I'm not sure maintaining their own network makes sense unless everything becomes compatible and they use it as an additional revenue stream. But for them to compete when every other auto manufacturer is subsidizing shared networks is risky.
The competitors also charge much less quickly, so there's some optimization there that they lack. Like, on paper they can do 250 kW but you never get more than 100 when actually charging it etc
Yeah this is one area where there's a lot of deceptive marketing. For example the Kia EV6 specs list a max fast charging rate of 350 kW but what that actually means is that you need a 350 kW charging station to reach the car's actual max charging speed of 240 kW (or 180 kW, depending on the battery options).
Granted, that is still nice and fast, and the EV6 is a great car, but it's really frustrating how hard it is to compare charge speed from different manufacturers.
Wow that is the scummiest thing
The car simply states the fastest DC connection it supports - 350kw. It works with any charger up to this wattage, just like my laptop charges from any USB-C source up to 100w - was I missold my laptop too because if I use a 50w charger it only charges at 50w?
DC Fast Charge Time (10-80% @ 350 kW via Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment) Level 3 Charger: Approx. 18 min.
and
Drive Battery Energy: 77.4 kWh
The battery is 77.4 kWh. This implies the battery is charging at 180kW.
If it were taking in the full 350kW and losing 170kW as heat that would be one (inefficient and dangerous) thing, but it doesn't sound like it actually draws 350kW?
For comparison, they say 73min for charging at 50kW, which implies the battery is charging at 45kW. If we figure that same 10% loss, then to charge at 180kW it's probably drawing 200kW from the charger.
[1] https://www.kia.com/us/en/ev6/specs
[2] 70% * 77.4 kWh * (60min / 1h) / 18 min = 181 kW
I'd thought they were advertising a 10% to 80% charge because that's the period over which they can charge at max speed? Looking now, it seems like they start tapering at 50%, and it's peak draw is 235kW? https://www.arenaev.com/kia_ev6_crowned_the_best_charging_ev...
(I agree this is very good, but it's still wrong to quote 350kW if they never draw this much.)
I assure you that my mother has no idea what a watt is.
> it's really frustrating how hard it is to compare charge speed from different manufacturers
Is the discrepancy just the inefficiency (i.e. waste heat) of the charging circuitry and/or battery chemistry? And if so, do different EV battery+charger systems have significantly different efficiencies?
I would have expected that the consumer-facing spec is always the power taken from the grid, that there is always some inefficiency (you can draw less energy from the batteries than came out of the grid), and that the level of efficiency would be roughly similar across all cars.
If that were the case, it wouldn't be much of a problem to compare charging rates across cars. But perhaps one or more of my expectations are wrong.
Oh, and EVs presumably vary wildly in their "fuel economy" (miles per kilowatt-hour or whatever unit EV folks use), so even a "fair" comparison of charging rate presumably wouldn't paint the entire picture.
I'm not positive on the specifics but I believe it has more to do with the combination of supported voltages/amperages offered by different chargers. i.e. a "350 kW capable" charger in practice means it can do 800V charging, which other chargers of lower kW ratings typically can't do, and the EV6 requires 800V to reach its max charge speed but can't actually handle a high enough amperage to get to 350 kW.
Like I said though, I might be confused on some of the details there, but I'm fairly positive it's not just waste heat...dissipating 110kW of waste heat would require some pretty insane cooling hardware.
Oh, and EVs presumably vary wildly in their "fuel economy" (miles per kilowatt-hour or whatever unit EV folks use), so even a "fair" comparison of charging rate presumably wouldn't paint the entire picture.
This is indeed a good point. A more relevant measure of charging speed would be something like "miles per hour at EPA rated efficiency", though even that gets messy since most cars don't charge at a linear speed. And I haven't seen any car manufacturers use this metric other than Tesla, who like to brag about their supercharger stations exceeding 1,000 MPH of charging speed (though only the newest stations can just barely do that, for very short durations, and only on certain car models). "Time from 20%-80% charge" would also be a better metric, due to non-linear charging speed curves, but I haven't seen that one used much either.
Pretty much the only time charging speed even matters is the "road trip" mode, where you are driving further than a single battery charge in one day and you want to stop as little as possible. In that mode, all I really want to know is what my duty cycle will be, e.g. "every 5 hours of driving you'll need to stop to charge for 30 minutes."
If I'm not in road trip mode, then as long as I can Level 2 charge overnight and/or all day at work, I would barely care what the peak charge rate is. It would still be nice to have something quick for the rare pickle (and of course road trips), but it doesn't seem like that big of a deal. I guess it's so prominent in marketing because range anxiety is still so deep in our mindset?
Counterintuitively, it can be cheaper timewise (and money-wise) to spec and build a new factory than to re-tool one that was custom-built to manufacture cars with a large set of core assumptions about power plant and drive train.
A trivial example (in unnecessary complexity, physical properties not really involved): on the German website, when you pretend to be ordering an Audi A6 you get twelve different sets of wheels to choose from at five price points. And that's before you add winter wheels to the mix. And tire options, and different approaches to the pressure gauge problem and theft preventing bolts. The Tesla S offers a choice between baseline and expensive an optional winter wheel. Now this isn't an example that directly relates to range, but it's organisational cruft. They need to have boatloads of people employed only for solving various aspects of their solution to the made-up problem of not enough wheel choice (all the way from design to spare parts logistics..) and that robs focus. Those people might actually have better careers than their peers dealing with batteries and they do compete for intraorganizational attention. It's all rooted in customer expectations built over decades of inventing car problems to solve better than the competition, after the ICE was basically done. New, BEV-specific lines can help (apparently the e-tron gets by with only eight sets of wheels at two price points, yay!), but they are far from being as much of a fresh start as that blank slate as Tesla has been.
Tesla is in no position to do so. They have a strong position in battery assembly, but zero direct presence in extraction or refining.
The ,,false advertising'' that others say come from the fact that when you drive fast it doesn't matter how energy efficient you are, so it works out only with low speeds.
I don’t know if people have heard, but China is one of the bigger market. Heh.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/03/south-korea-fines-tesla-for-...
As a Tesla owner: range and ambient air temperature are significantly correlated (i.e., your 300 miles of range plummets to ~120 when below freezing).
But, on a good, sunny, warm day, their range claims are correct.
My Model S is certainly better at handling the winter than a Nissan Leaf of the same vintage.
Personally, I prefer an open window. Fresh air is almost always better than warm/cold stale air. But I think that'll kill a car's aerodynamics anyway, maybe worse for efficiency than running the heater/AC.
Battery longevity will also soon include depth-of-discharge and temp limits as well.
Just like FSD works, vaguely, on a good clear day (not too sunny, though, in case you blind the vision sensors!) on good roads.
Totally ready "this year".
I don't think Tesla is as far ahead on range as everyone thinks. Highway miles are what matters and Tesla tends to be optimistic on their numbers.
The only cars that get the 'A' rating on that spreadsheet are the two Model 3 cars (316 mile version, and 200ish mile one), the 62kWh Nissan Leaf (216mi), and a bunch of super low range cars where efficiency is easy, since weight is way lower.
Competitors are catching up, yes, but they're still pretty far behind in the efficiency game... which means that Tesla can produce quite a few more cars for the same amount of raw battery pack. Which drives better margins and more production capacity.
I wish the EPA would clamp down on manufacturer's range estimates, as those ranges are theoretical (perfect driving with no real acceleration, no climate control, etc). We need practical city/highway range like we get for ICE cars. My EV6 is rated at 310, but driving as conservatively as possible in Houston I get more like 285. On a road trip where it was mostly exposed freeway and cruise control, my range was closer to 220.
Should also probably disclose range in freezing temps as well (I'm in Houston so I don't consider that as much as others). The first manufacturer to solve that problem well would possibly be a better car than one with a larger theoretical range.
"Every Tesla we've tested has failed to hit its EPA range estimate"
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-cons...
Is this something you see as a benefit? For me Tesla's overall aesthetic, including both their exterior looks and interior design, along with the absence of physical controls that go long with that represent their biggest downsides (outside of build quality).
I wonder how long Tesla can get away with not offering CarPlay/Android Auto functionality. The lack of that basic, cheap, and often used feature disqualifies any car from consideration in my view.
I find Saab's solution to be extremely elegant - on some, if not all models, there's a night mode button - what happens is that all non-essential instruments are simply dimmed to black (leaving only the speedo lit), until something happens which warrants your attention; the instrument in question will then come on.
Simultaneously, it dims all button backlights &c to just about off, so that you only get some assistance in locating the control you're after, not losing your night vision the moment you let your eyes stray from the road.
What's REALLY bad though is that other manufacturers rushed after Tesla and turned their brains off. Now we have a bunch of electric cars with crappy plastic interiors (light weight for range) and shitty tablets as user interface. Some are recognizing these horrifying mistakes that will cost lives but it will take years to recover because a lot of projects are too far ahead already to be changed or canceled.
I mainly speak from extensive experience with Volkswagen - the crappy capacitative touch buttons on the steering wheel will finally go. The new CEO Blume is not as blind as Herbert Diess - he doesn't view Tesla as the second coming of the iPhone, especially since Teslas continue to stagnate in quality and other manufacturers are quickly catching up.
Good luck outproducing Hyundai, Kia, Volkswagen, BMW, Audi... time was Teslas ally especially because Toyota kept insisting on Hydrogen cars for so long and VW fucked up software development so bad with CARIAD that Konrad Zuse is spinning in his grave ready to produce energy for all EVs sold.
I credit Tesla with 2 things:
- Opening the EV market and pushing other manufacturers to invest
- Great engineering regarding battery and range (in the past)
The list of issues is longer nowadays and I am not willing to forgive quite as much as in 2014 with great alternatives on the market.
The interiors though are pure trash. They look unfinished and designed by Rule of Cool, instead of practicality.
> Is this something you see as a benefit?
Yes. It's a distraction free operating environment. Tesla's aesthetic choices are semi-scandinavian/Ikea. Minimal doesn't have to be that style specifically. The early New Beetle did a passable job. The typical car is like MS Word with every ribbon open at once. A minimalist interior is focus mode.
I cannot activate most controls on a Tesla without taking my eyes off the road.
They also seemingly refuse to keep the GUI stable for more than three or four months at a time.
Multi-touch capacitance with tuned solid state haptic feedback and fused OLED display technology with very thin tempered glass is a wonderful thing, especially considering how far it has gotten since 2007) but it has remained resounding and disappointingly flat.
While manufacturers are working with different display dimensions and gentle curves or even folds, I agree there is a need for topologically shaped glass to bring the tactile affordances of traditional buttons to software enhanced user interfaces. I'm not a display engineer but I suspect that different glass thicknesses result in poor visuals so we will have to wait for organic magneto-laser displays.
It really doesn't help when the leadership of said car company is erratic and eroding the goodwill of the brand while people generally feel comfortable with more established carmakers. I feel pretty confident that major automakers are going to be around in 10 years. Buying a Tesla already feels like a bit of a gamble to me just because of its newness.
With an economy that's already slowing it could really hurt them when it's likely fewer people are buying cars and will be more cautious about it when they do. "Maybe I'll hold off another year and see how the new crop of cars compares with the Tesla."
[0] https://www.torquenews.com/14335/tesla-sweetens-deal-discoun...
https://twitter.com/TroyTeslike/status/1609346097733828609?s... (This is the most recent data made public, the Patreon data goes through Dec 31 with the numbers quoted)
Which are all gimmicks.
The vast majority of people don't want that from a car. I've been in Telsas plenty of time and absolutely hate it. Yeah it looks cool for a moment, but I would never want that.
The “cockpit” button-obsession on HN is really cute sometimes. As if most drivers with button-filled “cockpits” actually feel around for them while still looking at the road.
Everything timing critical for driving is either fully automated or on the wheel in a Tesla, by the way.
It's also starting to creep into the mainstream consciousness that EVs aren't a good long-term solution to our poor transportation system.
I agree. That's why it doesn't make sense that Tesla is approaching it as "bespoke or bust".
> Bluetooth audio is a thing, and you can stream whatever audio you want from your phone to your car audio using that.
Yes, but "streaming a single audio track (with low audio quality)" is pretty much all BlueTooth is fit for, and the problem is much larger than that--a luxury car should be able to stream higher quality audio and it should also be able to stream video (e.g., HBO, Paramount Plus, etc). Moreover, it should facilitate a media browsing experience through the touch screen. First of all, it's limited to audio--it doesn't help me stream HBO or Paramount or any other video service.
Apple and I believe Google are very strict about which apps can be used for CarPlay/Android Auto. There would be major repercussions if they weren’t.
Tesla has apps for a bunch of video streaming services. And for those it doesn't have, you can just use the built-in web browser. It works just fine (assuming you are in a parked mode, they won't work while you are driving for obvious safety reasons).
Tesla are 5-10 years ahead on profit, due to adopting cost savings such as no buttons, more miles per kwh, thus smaller batteries, casting most of the body in 2 or 3 pieces.
And then there's in house software creation, vs everyone else. Software makes their use of their motors more efficient.
That's before you have the problem with how to get rid of your non EV business.
Then you have battery tech, opening lithium refining facilities, owning more of the supply chain. Everyone else will be paying extra for batteries for decades.
You think automakers don't know about software? You do realize that what the ECU has to do to keep internal combustion engines running as efficiently as they do today is at least an order of magnitude more complex that electric motor management
> That's before you have the problem with how to get rid of your non EV business.
That's an asset, not a liability. Some places in the world are unlikely to have the infrastructure to support a conversion to EVs in the next decade or two. It doesn't mean we stop trying but having mature technology that you don't need to invest a lot in to support a niche use case is a good thing, not a bad thing.
> Then you have battery tech, opening lithium refining facilities, owning more of the supply chain. Everyone else will be paying extra for batteries for decades.
There's no reason to believe that Tesla's suppliers will remain exclusively theirs unless they've signed massive longterm deals that the public is unaware of.
Judging from my experience with cars' integrated sat-nav, speech recognition and bluetooth hands-free I would say most automakers do not consider good software to be a priority.
https://www.teslarati.com/volkswagen-herbert-diess-third-par...
Tesla will be Tesla's supplier https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-19/tesla-con...
Many Chinese companies are multifaceted or have co-ownership with suppliers. For example, look at a company like BYD, which appears to be out producing Tesla and has yet to fully enter many markets. They also build their own batteries. The Chinese motor industry is a formidable competitor.
They want everything in the same darn place that 99% of cars have it, with physical switches to be able to change things so you can just feel what you are doing without taking your eyes off the road.
Most people see the interior of a Tesla as a complete gimmick.
That is the insane minority.
btw I have the same preference, just letting you know you are in for a disappointment.
[1] https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/fiat/panda [2] https://www.parkers.co.uk/nissan/leaf/review/interior/ [3] https://www.kymco.co.uk/scooters-and-motorcycles-range/125cc...
But by the way, you don’t have to hunt thru a menu for it, the lock status icon is pressable and it’s always on the home screen.
Lock and unlock is like start and stop buttons. Almost totally extraneous and easily inferred 99% of the time.
Conveniently accessible manual door lock/unlock mechanisms become non-negotiable the moment your software-based power-dependent interface becomes inoperable, especially if that's during some emergent crisis like say a giant lithium battery letting the smoke out.
This isn't just some hypothetical:
https://stealthoptional.com/news/tesla-driver-trapped-in-bur...
From your own linked article:
> Juhta criticized the emergency protocol for Tesla’s electric cars, saying that it isn’t intuitive enough.
Which is kinda ironic to me considering anytime a new rider is in my car I make sure to tell them about pressing the small button to open the door because they seem to find that escape latch on their own and often think it's just a regular open door latch.
Is it the same in the Model Y from the article as your Model 3?
This is pretty much the definition of a great tech product: it's ahead of anything else by N years. What makes a great technology company is that they manage to consistently maintain that lead with product after product.
We'll see if Tesla can maintain its lead. It's not looking good and it probably depends mostly on whether or not Elon Musk can regain his grip on reality.
They do have one major advantage, which is why I still drive a Model S, and that's the Supercharger network. It's a big deal for anyone who regularly drives a few hundred miles in their EV.
I still don't get the 'look good' part, why do non-ICE cars always need to have a different look that what is already popular/proven in the market. The traditional automakers are still doing this today with their first big pushes in EV. If they don't sell they'll blame 'the market' for not wanting EV, but in reality it could be folks just aren't interested in the design / don't what to make the fashion statement.
"We have tens of billions and tens of decades invested in 'perfecting' ICE. This is a huge upheaval" is an attitude I'd expect any of them to take (while still recognizing they need to see where the market is heading and planning for that).