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.
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.
Of course now they've gutted this team perhaps that won't be the case for long
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.
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
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.
The hardware is super simple. Probably costs $5.
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
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.
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
Quite the reverse, actually—it's an anti-safety feature.
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.
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.
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.