Model 3

>Loses performance as you drive

lol no

>>17134302
Tesla isn't a serious company or they would have lead with this.

>>17134498
They lead with an Electric Lotus. It was a total turd and they had to get a government bailout. The S had to come because a car had to be huge to accommodate such a large battery pack that's never been done on a production car. They marketed it as "luxury" so rich fags who were used to buying BMWs and Land Rovers wouldn't complain about the unreliability.

>>17134517
>They marketed it as "luxury" so rich fags who were used to buying BMWs and Land Rovers wouldn't complain about the unreliability.
Fucking genius, this is what most Euro startup super car companies do. hell, this is what Ferrari did for a lot of their cars. people are dumb badge whoring fucks. the only reason the Tesla "badge" means something to people is because its already synonymous with "Electric" cars and after other Manufacturers try to make luxury Electric cars they just can't get the publicity of Tesla. it also doesn't hurt that Elon Musk is a fairly charming dude to people and speaks very generous optimism to say the least. Whens the last time the CEO of VAG or chief engineer of Porsche came on talk shows and shit?

>>17134317
that looks fucking terrible

it's like a retarded Snivy

File: no mouth.jpg (29KB, 250x323px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 250x323px

>>17134317

>>17134302
So many normies will buy it mark my words
It has everything a normie wants

File: 1473148967710.jpg (4MB, 3010x2008px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3010x2008px

>tfw 3 family members put a deposit down on it and are going to buy one
It's literally the ultimate normiemobile. Keep in mind, one of these people (my uncle) already has a Tesla Model S 85 and the battery life is nowhere close to advertised and the Florida heat isn't helping... yet he's going to willingly give another ~$35k to this company he's only had constant problems with.

Elon's man Musk is too strong for normies I suppose.

>>17135531
Well maybe your family is investing in the future of the planet. Someone fucking has to, especially once the EPA gets scrapped.

>>17135541
investing in the future of the planet means driving something very small and lightweight. Like a kei-car, pushbike or a motorcycle.

>>17135531
Apple of the car world

The only people I've seen interested in this is techies. One of the biggest nerds I know, who's an Apple fanboy by the way, put down a deposit. He doesn't own a car as we live in Boston.

I'd bet my life on it he's only getting it because

1.) it's Musk and he can do no wrong
2.) It's an electric vehicle. Electric vehicles are state of the art technology. He likes technology. It only makes sense he likes the Model 3 as an affordable-ish electric car.
3.) It's run out of Silicon Valley. And it's run like a tech startup. Maybe not as obvious as a reason but I'm sure it subconsciously influences his opinion of it.
4.) I doubt he knows much about cars in the first place considering he barely drives around now.

>>17135541
>investing in the future of the planet
By piling up government (our) debt?

>>17134302
Jesus Christ it's hideous. Shaped just like a prius

>>17135577
>2.) It's an electric vehicle. Electric vehicles are state of the art technology. He likes technology. It only makes sense he likes the Model 3 as an affordable-ish electric car.

I highly doubt that.

1st, the EV's are only emerging, technology isn't mature enough if you compare it to IC engines.

2nd, infrastructure sucks, you can't charge it in minutes while you perfectly can do that if you have IC engine.

The nearest future is E85/biodiesel.

E85 is quite promising actually, especially if we talk about gasoline DI engines with FI: you can run very high compression ratio with boost.

>>17135573
>Apple of the car world
you're spot on

>>17134498
Wrong. They used exactly the right strategy you need to do when you're trying to start up in an established market. Create a niche and expensive model that will appeal to the enthusiasts, work out the kinds with that because you know they're the die hards and will forgive any imperfections. Then create a product with mass appeal once you have the experience and some data about what works and what doesn't. If Tesla rushed to market with a $30,000 sedan it would've been a complete and utter shitshow. Look at their Roadster, it was a disaster and the first generation Model S wasn't so great either.

>>17135591
Maybe state of the art was too big of a phrase. But it still is a highly interesting technology that would get people in the tech world who know nothing about cars excited about these kinds of cars. Especially from a SV based car company.

>>17135541
Alphonse you dumb nigger

>>17134317
Thank you Elong for putting another shit ugly car on the roads. This is our generation's Aztec.

>>17134605
>Elong
>Charming
pick one

>>17135609
>our generation's Aztec
Are you 10 years old?

File: lehappybowieface.png (346KB, 816x785px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 816x785px

>Can't make a car with better build quality than a early 2000s dodge for 70k
>Making a 35k car
This is going to end well.

>>17134302
Do they even have the same customer demographic? Most people that I know that preordered one own hatchbacks, japanese and american cars.

I love it when clueless normalfags with a degree in cocksucking call a heap of batteries and a few electric motors "advanced technology". Give me two week and 10k and I'll build you an electric car with a similar or better range.

>>17135603
Protip: Most people in tech seem smart but are actually as dumb as a goldfish. Look at Elon, he thought designing and building a car would be identical to building a cell phone.

I mean really, stop and think about that for a second, how far does one need to have their head up their ass to think consumer electronics and automobile engineering are comparable.

>>17135601
i see it a little bit differently, but anyways the idea is the same:

1. design and sell [very] expensive model to maximize $$$ per car sold.
2. invest as much $$$ as possible in technology to beta-test it
3. design 'cheap' model using stuff learned to gain market
4. Prophet

>>17134317
The front of these being flat is just an atrocity.
>>17134377
That's not how lithium batteries work.

>>17135629
The catch is that the Model 3 MUST be a success. Tesla are losing money hand over fist trying to set up all the infrastructure necessary for their cars to succeed, such as the gigafactory and the superchargers. There's only so long a company can post 500+ million losses. If the Model 3 flops Tesla might as well throw the towel in, I don't think they can survive another 5 years while they develop a new model if they keep losing cash like they are now.

>>17135648
If we meme it, it will be so

>>17135660
Why would we do that? Tesla fans are obnoxious and the last thing America needs is more cars that baby people and lead to more useless shit added through regulation.

>>17135665
No, we meme it to failure. On the other hand I'd like normies to have cars that accelerate quickly, more people make it through lights etc.

>>17134302

>Will it BTFO the 3 series?

Yes, just like the Cadillac STD and the Alfa Romeo Giulia obliterated the 3 series!

>>17134679
Sadly this, normies will lap it up thinking they're getting a Model S for $35k or less
The idiots don't realise that the fit and finish as well as build quality will be way worse than the already mediocre Model S' and X. I predict that even the Civic will have a nicer interior

>>17135611
People who were born when the Aztec came out are having more sex than you now

>>17135541
>investing in the future of the planet
>with a personal luxury automobile that needs of 1200lbs of lithium to cart around your 1.5 children in suburbia
Don't fucking kid yourself

>>17135678
How are they going to be assembled worse than other cars that are built in the same plant by the same company?

>>17135684
I'm still the winning sperm

>>17135667
The flipside is if the Model X does well enough for Tesla to keep it's head above water then they're poised to be extremely successful. They're on the forefront of automated driving technology so they could potentially be one of the first companies to offer automated hauling services and automated taxi services. If they can grab a big enough market share before Toyota, VAG, etc catch up then they'll be in a fantastic position. Petroleum is only going to get more and more expensive, so if Tesla can stay alive time is in it's favor.

>>17135691
How are they going to be assembled just as well for half the price?
How are they going to have acceptable build quality when their high end cars still don't?

>>17135691
Easy. Elong grossly overpromised production quanity compared to their capability. Corners will be cut everywhere and burned out laborers wont give a shit.

>>17135695
>They're on the forefront of automated driving technology
Plz go back to /g/, you are embarassing yourself.

>>17135691
C classes were made in the same factory that my S class was. Are you implying that they should also have the same built quality? Because I guarantee you that it's the exact opposite

>>17135703
Except, they are. Name one other mass produced car that has autopilot anywhere near the level of Teslas

>>17135701
Even if the labourers did have a shit to give, they probably can't with the material, material and time they get.

File: ink-costs-more-than-human-blood_50290ced00807_w1500.jpg (654KB, 1500x1916px) Image search: [Google]

654KB, 1500x1916px

>>17135695
The Model X slams it's stupid fucking doors against other cars and people's heads
And oil is dirt fucking cheap

>>17135707
Google, Uber, Mercedes, Audi, BMW, etc.

Audi's auto pilot can pelt you around a track at full speed, and Mercedes' system requires you to touch the wheel every 90 seconds so you don't start watching Harry Potter like a dumbfuck and getting yourself killed
>LOL IT'S JUST A BETA BRO

>>17135707
Infiniti Q50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY_zqEmKV1k

Besides Tesla nobody else in the industry is retarded enough to call the combo active braking, cruise control and lane departure assist 'autopilot'.

>>17135712
>And oil is dirt fucking cheap
Only in the US, and it's not going to stay that way. Oil is finite and it's going to get harder and harder to extract and push up prices. It's inevitable.

>>17135717
Ok? Name the model of car any of those companies produce right now that can drive as well as a Model S on autopilot. I'm well aware that all automakers are developing autopilot systems, they'd be retarded if they weren't. Tesla is the only one with vehicles on the road RIGHT NOW in consumer hands driving themselves.

File: Cruise%20Pollution(1).png (530KB, 700x461px) Image search: [Google]

530KB, 700x461px

>>17135720
>what is ethanol
>what is bio-diesel
>what is e-gas
Nah bro, let's just ditch a well established infrastructure because it hurts some hippie's fee-fees

All of the cars in the world combined don't pollute anywhere close to the massive fucking ships running off of bunker oil needed to ship those heavy Teslas and their parts and batteries all around the world

File: W222-Mercedes-A6.jpg (172KB, 1200x649px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1200x649px

>>17135732
Go sit in any high end luxury car. I'm biased towards Mercedes so go check out the W222 S Class

>>17135712
Ink is high tech. Why shouldnt it be more expensive than blood?

>>17135734
All of those are more expensive to produce than petroleum. The price to run your car is still going up. They're also more inefficient than current electric cars.

>>17135740
Not even close. I accept your surrender.

>>17135740

Tesla looks like spaceship from the future compared to this trumpmobile.

File: 586925f5-a0f1-483d-9a6d-0fd4497c60a7_400_compressed.jpg (5KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 400x400px

>>17135745
It's predicted that we'll hit peak oil by 2030, not because we'll be running out but because it'll just be cheaper to produce alternatives than it would be to extract oil from the Earth

>durr why would you use LED bulbs when incandescents are so much cheaper?
This is how you sound

>>17135748
>>17135756
Just admit that you've never sat in any of these cars

>>17135744
It's not like they've been producing it for decades. It's like economics of scale doesn't apply to printer manufacturers

>printer costs less than the ink despite being bundled with ink

>>17135745
Electric cars are so much less efficient in the hot or cold. And if your area is still using coal, you're just moving the pollution away from you

>>17135756
Teslas look and feel like they were made by Ikea

>>17135761
>It's predicted that we'll hit peak oil by 2030, not because we'll be running out but because it'll just be cheaper to produce alternatives than it would be to extract oil from the Earth
That's because oil is getting more expensive as the deposits that are easy to reach are exhausted and we need to turn to more expensive methods of extraction. There's a reason shale oil wasn't a big industry in the 90s but it's huge now. The point stands, cars that run on conventional fuel are going to get progressively more expensive. Electric is the future because energy is just getting cheaper and cheaper.

>>17135761

Because the light from incandescent is nicer and I prefer it

>>17135778
tism

>>17135777
>Electric is the future because energy is just getting cheaper and cheaper.
Where the fuck do you think the electricity comes from you tard? It's not like we are mining it out of the ground.

File: coal-polluted-sunset.jpg (2MB, 3015x2048px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3015x2048px

>>17135777
It sure is

Everytime I see a Tesla I crave for a Fisker Karma more.
>ywn own a Karma
Life is suffering.

>>17135768
Just buy new printers everytime you run out of ink and stop crying

>>17135785
Environmentally friendly unicorn farts

>>17135785
Wind, solar, hydro. Renewables.

>>17135763

Had 2006 S350 if that counts. It was worn out piece of shit but still.

Drove in Model S only as passenger as some clients from Austria visited company where I work and Tesla was their company car.

>>17135778
everyone does because of evolution. the mindless pop-sci drone that wants to save the world doesn't know this of course.

>>17135626
Oh shit, I didn't realize your mental prowess until you posted it on this rice quality monitoring board.

Here's money whimsical stranger

>>17135791
I went paperless, HP can go fuck themselves

>>17135785

High efficiency coal pants in worst case scenario.

Still much better than ICE in average car.

>>17135788
Sucks to live in a country that still uses fossil fuels to generate power. Luckily I live in a modern first world country, one day you burgerfats will catch up

>>17135785
Technically he is correct, as technology improves we will get energy for cheaper and cheaper. I'm hoping for the thorium breakthrough within a few decades, last I checked the big bottleneck is getting a drain pipe that can withstand the temps but not corrode.

>>17135794
I'm sure Mercedes has some advanced autopilot going on in 2006

>>17135802
Enjoy those rapefugees

>>17135801
Need a sauce on that claim

>>17135795
I just want to save my wallet
>9 watts vs 60 watts

>>17135793
I'm sure those will meet America's energy demands, when the country already has to import 40% of its electricity

>>17135815
Could go nuclear but too many retards are terrified of it

>>17135793
Doesn't work. Why? Because it can't cover the base load, no matter how many wind and solar plants you build.
>just use pumped-storage plants lmao
It would require several thousand pumped-storage plants just to partially smoothen the power fluctuation from wind and solar in Germany. Even if you had the space for all those pumped-storage plants, you could as well build hundreds of nuclear power plants instead and generate infinitely more reliable power.
t. from a country that fell for the eco meme

>>17135822
Wynne is shutting down a nuclear plant in Ontario after dumping money into windmills and giving electricity away for virtually free to Jew York. She thought it was a good deal

>>17135828
Don't Germans pay like 40 cents per kwh? That's over 4 times more than what we pay

>>17135822
>muh 3 mile island
Don't build plants on fault lines
>muh fukushima
Don't build plants on coasts
>muh chernobyl
Don't use an experimental design from fucking soviet russia that was slap-dashed together
NUCLEAR IS THE FUTURE JUST BUILD THE PLANTS SMART REEEEEEEE

>>17135793
>wind

As a wind turbine technician I can say they aren't good for the environment.
It's filled with oils, grease and chemicals, the people servicing them drive around in big fuel guzzling diesel vans driving large distances (I personally do about 80-100k km a year).

Also they barely produce any power compared to coal and gas powered powerplants. They only ones that produce a lot are the off-shore ones, which are much more expensive to build, need way more maintenance and need replacement quicker.

The only reason they're popular here is the money the owners get, due to government funding.

>>17135804

Mine didn't have anything but park sensors but I can still compare interiors.

Tesla suits my taste much better, it's all tech no shitty bling, looks so fresh and modern.

Merc has more of a feel of your rich grandpas living room and bathroom mix with kitschy chrome details and furniture type stitched leather.

>>17135847
My problem with tesla is that god-awful touchscreen for almost literally everything.

File: fire.png (116KB, 400x280px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 400x280px

>>17135841
How afraid are you of living this out?

>>17135809

Just google it, there was study on it.

In terms of CO2 emission Tesla powered purely from coal power plant has footprint of small euro diesel car.

>>17135847
I have a newer W221, same generation as you car and I can safely say that the interior in the Model S is an entire class below the Merc's at least.

Tesla put more emphasis on "modern looks" than actual comfort

>>17135834
it's below 30 cents but it's climbing fast and 56% of it is taxes (to subsidise wind and solar).

>>17135847
>Tesla suits my taste much better, it's all tech no shitty bling, looks so fresh and modern.
Did anybody else cringe when they read this?

>>17135864
Californian marketing, it works.

>>17135857
Doesn't take into consideration the giant lithium batery that needs to be shipped across the world from the mines, through several processing facilities, and finally to Tesla's factories

>>17135869

It's one time only.

What about hundreds of tons of fuel that has to be shipped in the lifetime of average car.

Keep in mind that even the process of fuel refining is only 80% or so efficient.

With electric there are no refining and very small distribution losses.

>>17135857
it is much bigger when you consider the fact that a small diesel is more efficient than coal plants and that the diesel will survive much longer than the battery pack, which takes much more energy to produce and recycle.

>>17135887
Most of a car's carbon footprint is during manufacturing

>>17135864

Poor are always against any kind of progress. It's really sad.

>>17135887
>and very small distribution losses
the charging process alone has an efficiency of 90% and it goes down with higher current (faster charging).

>>17135888

Small diesel ICE is at around 35% efficient while coal plant is at what 80% or so?

There are also huge refining and distribution losses with diesel and gas.

>>17135892
When you grow up you'll see it is usually the opposite.

>>17135892
>Edison-endurace-car.jpg

>>17135901

No, it's very near 100%

>>17135904
>while coal plant is at what 80% or so?
do you have serious brain damage?

>>17135913
I forgot that Teslas don't need any cooling because they're so efficient

You idiot

>>17135917
He's a Tesla fanboy so obviously

>>17135913
are you >>17135904 ? please read a book.

>>17135648
>The catch is that the Model 3 MUST be a success. Tesla are losing money hand over fist trying to set up all the infrastructure necessary for their cars to succeed, such as the gigafactory and the superchargers.

I was in Cali/ bay area few months ago and Tesla's were everywhere. They are on the right track

File: 1489854525322.jpg (60KB, 540x498px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 540x498px

>>17135904
>coal
>80%
only gas can reach over 40%

>>17135855
Not.

Mostly because we have a different model in which that can't really happen, and if it did we're down easy.

>>17135917
>>17135944

Steam turbine vs piston engine efficiency

>>17136078
>Moving the current average global efficiency rate of coal-fired power plants from 33% to 40% by deploying more advanced off-the-shelf technology could cut two gigatonnes of CO2 emissions now, while allowing affordable energy for economic development and poverty reduction

>>17135892
>muh progress

cancer

>>17135541
How the fuck is subsidizing Elon musks empire LARPing fantasy saving the planet? They should drive reliable vehicles that are efficient and don't break down and grow their own food . No, they'd rather spend $35k on a plastic and metal manufactured disposable piece of shit to drive to Costco every week. Fuck your family

>>17136435
no no no you don't understand, if you give Musk all of your money we will all have electric cars and fart rainbows and global warming will stop

>>17136450
I hear these boomer cocksuckers call into the radio talking about how they are so progressive and responsible because they bought the newest ford EV. Maybe get your fat fuckin boomer ass a bicycle and use that energy from backpatting yourself to pedal it to your community garden. Don't buy the newest flatscreen or iPhone. But nooo you just gotta have it

People are talking about saving the environment all wrong

We need to change how we live and interact and survive versus upgrading our current empty soulless lives

>>17134302
Looks like a Mazda.

>>17136473
but that's anti capitalist anon

you need to buy new stuff constantly

>>17135892
>progress
>technology older than ICE
lol.

>>17136222
Lol what the hell do this my power plant efficiency was just a meme all along? Wtf i unironically love combustion engines now

>>17136514
At least the battery, controller and electric motor technology has evolved.
ICEs didn´t change much since WW2...

>>17136580
the electric motor tech hasn't really evolve
the battery is what evolve the most

>>17136590
We can now cast the rotors for asyngchone motors instead of welding/milling them.
The asynchrone motors made a huge jump with better calculatins, the synchrone motors got a lot smaller with neodyme magnets and the controllers got a lot better.
Of course batterys made the biggest improvement, but the rest got better as well.

Meanwhile the only advancements in ICEs are electronic controlls and variable valve timing.

>>17135740
Honestly my mom's chrysler 300c had a better interior than the tesla i test drove. Comparing an s class to a tesla is kinda pointless.

>>17136580
>ICEs didn´t change much since WW2
You're a nigger

>>17136625
>electric injection
>direct injection
>tighter tolerances
>higher compression ratios
Mazda's almost at homogeneous charge combustion and yet your one of those fags that are all like "durr pistons go up and down when the dinosaurs go boom boom"

>>17135793
You do realize that around 16-19% of the world's energy comes from those sources.

>>17135839
Chernobyl happened cus some guys thought it was a good idea to turn off safety systems. Although the reactor had design flaws. But i'm pretty sure it wouldn't have happened.

>>17136686
>electric injection
We had mechanical injection before, now it is electricaly controlled as I wrote.
>direct injection
As did some WW2 engines.
>tighter tollerances
Oh wow, that changes everything.
>higher compression ratios
Not even all that much.
The where running 1:7,5 compression ratios on 1,4 bar boost back then.

>>17136673
Wich new technology, except for electronic versions of previously mechanic systems, are new?

>>17136769
>lol it's just wires, nothing special

I guess you're right, the only thing special here the the kind of retarded you are

>>17136777
is the*
Smartphones dumb shit

>>17136777
I never wrote
>lol it's just wires, nothing special
The thing is, that these are only minor improvements over the mechanical versions.
They just don´t require maintainance, that is the main difference.

>>17136769
>>17136774
You guys are right, engines are all the same as they were 70 years ago. Only difference is that they have wires on them now

>>17136769
Tighter tolerances do change everything. Artillery rounds more than tripled in range because of tolerances.

>>17135839
Except no matter what you can't eliminate failure. AND Nuclear waste is always an issue. Nuclear isn't the future. It's dirty and lazy.

>>17136795
>minor improvements
Yeah, over decades. Engines now days are nothing like engines from WW2

>>17136803
CANDU reactors are pretty bulletproof, they're mechanically designed to shut down if there's a melt down

And nuclear waste can be used as fuel in breeder reactors, but the gubment doesn't like that because you can't make bombs that way

>>17136803
it will slow global warming though

>>17136804
So modern day engines are not direct injected forced induction engines with overhead camshaft like they made in WW2?

>>17136580
This is completely not true. ICE is so much more efficient now. Cars have gotten heavier, faster, crammed with more shit, and gas mileage has gone up. Not to mention all the tech advances in engines. VTC, VLC, Ethanol blend on the fly, etc etc etc etc.

>>17136816
>ICE are more efficient now
They aren´t much more efficient, they used to need 300g/kwh, nor it is 250g/kwh for gas engines.
The main difference between then and now is, that the gearboxes have a longer gear ratio and they stoped using carbs.
That technologie existed back inWW2 as well.

>>17136815
Modern wheels are the same too, right? I mean they're round aren't they?

You fucking idiot

>>17136836
>>17136815
So why aren't we still using engines from WW2? Surely it would be cheaper than constantly developing new engines

>>17136850
>Modern wheels
Well, the tires are made in a completely different way now and the spokes are different as well.

>>17136860
They're rubber bro, completely the same

>>17136855
Because we focus on different aspects than they did in WW2.

>>17136815
So modern day electric motors don't use winding electric currents and magnetic forces to generate power like they did in the 1800s?

>>17136868
Elaborate.

>>17136867
>rubber
not only rubber, but they get their stength due to fibre reinforcements.
This reinforcement changed in material and structure.
>>17136870
They don´t use graphite brushes and had a hell lot of efficiency improovement, they got from 40% up to 99%

>>17136886
>not only rubber, but they get their stength due to fibre reinforcements.
>This reinforcement changed in material and structure.
And somehow engine construction is still the same shit made from pig iron?

>>17136886
>99%
Source: your ass

>>17136886
So you agree that your statement was an over simplification and generalization of ICE development. Such as how different materials used and different designs do actually effect efficiency and power output.

>>17136871
Back then it had to be simple and cheap to produce.
Maintainance could be required.
fuel costs where less of an issue.

Today they may cost more and maintainance shouldn´t be required.
Fuel consumption got more in the focus.

>>17136904
IE4 class electric motors are required to have at least 97% efficiency.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elektromotor#Wirkungsgrad_und_Effizienz
>>17136899
They made them out of Aluminium back then as well.
>>17136908
It is still the same concept as it was 75 years ago, they didn´t even increase the efficiency by much.

>>17136836
I'm not sure if you're stupid or purposely being a fucking moron.

>>17135591

>>E85 is quite promising
>>lol biodiesel

Solar panels are cheap as fuck and getting cheaper. China is building more and more factories to supply them and here in the US more and more companies and contractors are cropping up to install them. The next problem is storage - there is a convergence in R&D here. Technologies that incorporate effective storage methods into the grid will also trickle/scale down to smaller systems like EV's, homes, and office buildings.

Meanwhile you want to waste more money on subsidizing farmers for E85 - which is less energy dense than gasoline, so have fun getting significantly less mpgs - or biodiesel which creates all kinds of pollutants and toxins when burned.

GTFO, man. E85 and biodiesel are stop-gap measure that barely even make sense anymore. The whole thing started up as a way to prop up the agriculture sector and promote "energy independence", but now we've got more oil and gas than we fucking know what to do with.

>>17136933
So ICEs have changed in the last 70 fucking years

>>17136936
not an Argument

>>17136868
>>17136933
>engines are totally different now, but they are the exact same

>>17136933
97% is not 99%

>>17136942
People don't have to argue shitty circular logic that is ignoring the facts.

>>17136944
They used the same technology, but developed engines with different goals.
>>17136947
>at least 97%

>>17136938
Solar panels will be super useful up here where we're covered in snow for half a fucking year

Elon Musk and his fanboys don't realise that California isn't the world

>>17136958
I think you're actually retarded

>>17136956
Not an argument without any facts.

>>17136958
They literally do not use the same technology. The tech is lighyears different. You just keep making horrible fucking excuses.

>hurrr fuel injection is just carburetters with electricity
You're a fucking idiot.

>>17136965
>the tech is lightyears different
Show me a example.
>hurrr fuel injection is just carburetters with electricity
I never claimed that, I said that electrical fuel injection is like mechanical fuel injection, but with electronic controll.

>>17136977
The burden of proof is on the accuser

>>17136933
In the same way electric motors have been, in concept, the same as 200 years ago. In terms of efficiency please explain how a 7.3L mercedes v12 from 2002 produced 547hp while a 6.5L Ferrari v12 now produces 789hp. Is that not increase in power output despite massive increase in fuel consumption and emission regulations?

File: Screenshot_2017-04-27-10-39-15.jpg (2MB, 1080x4298px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1080x4298px

>>17135541

6/10 bait would have believed it if I was browsing reddit.

>>17134517

I do remember this now that you mention.
It was tiny af and had shit box range but blew everything away 0-60. Then they did a bunch of one lap tests and tried to hype beast it. Now Elon puts out stuff like this tunnel video (get whiskey in glass before watching):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=j70GvgXt-lE

For a project called "the boring company" lol get it because cutting tunnels and no one cares xd. It pisses me up the wall because I have a hard-on for road design like /n/ does for trains but they only care that Elon is a "dirty cager" and "hypeloop not a tren".

His real money making venture should be spacex as its apparently already getting real market share. But even that is overrated imo. According to pic related we should already have jules verne tier guns that shoot shit into orbit. It would never get us to the moon but it would completely trap the satellite putting up and space junk bringing down market.

>>17135573
Fuck off at least I can use an apple to do things I would normally do with my dell. The tesla is the equivalent of selling a laptop without a battery, only plug in power. One half of the functionality is gone, always needing to cater to the need.of the laptop to be plugged in, that's the tesla. It's a way to trap idiots closer in to the city, whereas cars used to free you. It's gone beyond apple into the realm of sci-fi virtue signaling.

>>17135582
Looks like a Honda crosstour to me. The real question is how people buy into "luxury" in their heads when a Honda crosstour in leather with lol ipad dash is the same as any import.

>>17135603
> highly interesting
That's an "interesting" way to spell flammable

>>17137057
>The real question is how people buy into "luxury" in their heads when a Honda crosstour in leather with lol ipad dash is the same as any import.
The badge, literally that's it

>>17135628
He really thinks AI is gonna real soon, even from all the shit skins SV hires. And he thinks it's more dangerous than jews or overpopulation or anything. I really think he might just be a screwloose dude who had a couple good ideas and otherwise is autistic level clueless, like one of those guys in the heyday of Fox news who was "brilliant" but believed in private the earth is 5000 years old.

I've heard that the south African whites had bad problems with inbreeding dating back to their times as remote farming communities. Maybe he is just half retarded.

>>17137081
He's autistic. Go watch HBO's Silicon Valley then take a good look at Elon, he'll fit right in

>>17136982
You claimed there was a signifuicant difference.
You´ll have to prove there is one.

>>17137114
You claimed there wasn't, you have to prove there isn't

>>17137081
>>17137111
He went to Queen's university in Kingston, Canada. He's probably still addled from all the drugs

>>17135572
just buy a eurobox

>>17135841
What about those small scale aeroplastic ones?

>>17136998
As I wrote before, the main difference is in the batterys and controllers.
Also the modern asynchrone electric motors work with a totaly different concept than their synchrone brushed predecessor.

>>17137116
You can´t proove something doesn´t exist.
You can only proove something exists.

Most ICE engines work with the same recipocating piston and valve system as they did in WW2.

>>17137149
And electric motors are still a single metal shaft being spun by magnets and electricity, literally no progress

Tesla fags BTFO

>>17135890
Carbon doesn't even matter shit. Global warming due to greenhouse gas emissions is a scam based on bunk science, it's why they have to call it "climate change" now, but it's still bunk. The major things to look for are chemical pollution and particulate matter.

Chemical pollution is caused in all sorts of ways, one of which is metal manufacture. Lithium is a nasty process ground to metal but so is aluminum. More relevant to the health of most people is probably particulate matter. It's the solids coming out the tailpipe, which diesel is far worse on. So the tesla might help in cities or anywhere dense really, but it should be a hybrid to keep fuel for emergencies and Highway driving. So really, everything tesla is doing that we need is done better by established carmakers. Hypebeast 101.

>>17137155
>metal shaft being spun by magnets and electricity
Actualy modern induction motors don´t contain any magnets.

>>17135935

If the total economy of shitty throwaway appliances is anything to go off of, it unfortunately is poised to be a success now and a bigger one every year for a while.

>be one of the most successful tech businessmen
>start company, headhunt many of the top successes in their respective fields
>follow original gameplan exactly, every step fulfills itself as designed
>go public and hit market cap larger than US brands with 1 century of name recognition and massive infrastructure
>STILL not as smart as unemployed teens on an anime imageboard

When will they figure it out? The ONLY way to be successful is to consult with 4chan posters who casually think about something for 30 seconds before knowing everything about it.

>>17137202
Jew detected

>>17137202

Problem is everyone feels entitled to opinion even if not familiar with subject.

Tesla is doing alright but asking if it will """"BTFO"""" (god this is such a stupid new-age """""cuck"""" meme i cringe everytime i see it being used unironically) is just plain retarded.

Ofc it won't, you don't need to have a master degree in marketing to think rationally do you? For every tesla sold there are like 150 3-series and that's being kind to tesla.

File: 1475522359735.jpg (62KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 960x720px

>35 thousand fucking dollaridoos

SUCH LUXURY

SUCH QUALITY

TRULY A MASTERPIECE OF DESIGN

>>17137238

Nissan sold some 30k Leafs in 2014 and BMW 140k 3ers so it's not really 150:1 ratio.

File: yy_iy_05.gif (732KB, 250x355px) Image search: [Google]

732KB, 250x355px

>>17137289

>>17137289
just put a fuckin tablet in the dash bro

where we're going we don't need gauges

File: 10257740.jpg (33KB, 741x487px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 741x487px

thats really nice for nissan

File: 4eNM0MW.png (212KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 1280x1280px

>>17137289
>>17137289
>>17137289
>>17137289

someone should piss on that interior and let elon musk clean it himself, that is fucking awfull

>>17137289
>35k
What do you get for 35k including fuel for 10 years from other manufacturers?

>>17137324
>electricity is free

>>17137324

A fucking car I enjoy being in, instead of a jail cell on wheels.

File: 321.jpg (408KB, 1500x996px) Image search: [Google]

408KB, 1500x996px

>>17137332

They still made cars with retro look interior if you're after that.

>>17137324
>10 years

implying that plastic shitheap will last you 10 years, LEL.

>>17137331
No, but electric cars have less wear.
>>17137346
As far as I know the previous Teslas hadn´t major issues yet.

>>17137346

Why are you so upset about other peoples choices?

Don't be so insecure and let others live their life as they please.

>>17137359

Consumer reports listed Tesla is the 5th least reliable brand of automobile in 2017, their first year in the rankings I believe.

Nice try cucky

File: 7fLYtI0.gif (548KB, 203x335px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 203x335px

>>17137359
>as far as I know
you don't know shit homie

>>17137345

>in the future, design will simply be the absence of features

You are a genetic dead end.

>>17137363
jesus christ on a stick the projecting in this post is painfull to witness.

Go get some sleep anon

>>17137365
They are listed that bad because of minor stuff like Software Updates, not critical failiures.

>>17137366
How much of all Teslas build are still on the road?

>>17134676
underrated

>>17137384

A problem is still a problem, regardless if it's a fucking software issue or not.

Move the goal posts some more kiddo, ain't going to change the fact Tesla's are and will be garbage throw away cars at insane prices.

>>17134302
>cuckcar from the land of cuckhold
No thanks

File: RgIyo.jpg (133KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 800x600px

>>17137368

Jesus man, buttons, dials and knobs don't make features.

It's just progression of technology. Compare old control room of power plant or plane cockpit and you'll see the same thing happening.

Also more solid state stuff - higher reliability.

>>17137397
Well, the original goal was "running in 10 years", so you are moving the goalposts pretty much with "software update means unrelieable"

>>17137420

A software failure can absolutely prevent the operation of a vehicle reliably.

>>17137409

I wasn't indicating that the buttons and knobs are the missing factor, but the absolute deadpan design of the cockpit.

It is in no way progressive, but regressive in it's lack of design elements.

>>17137436
These Updates whe made mainly to add different features, not security.

>>17134302
This is the same Tesla that had the Model S downgraded below the 7 series and Lexus recently because of brake failures? The Tesla that has never made a profit on any car and had to resort to taking deposits on a vaporware Model 3 to bankroll the existing production in an automotive Ponzi scheme? The Tesla that is the next Fiska or Delorian? That Tesla?

>>17137451

According to Consumer Reports, Updates aren't listed, but problems fixed via software updates are counted on a per vehicle basis.

Their would have had to have been an issue which was remedied to be counted.

File: The Matrix _DivX_ 110_0001.jpg (20KB, 320x152px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 320x152px

>>17134317

>>17136803
>You can't eliminate failure
Thorium reactor design is literally designed to be its own failsafe. Something goes wrong, it pours itself into a safety tank thing.
>Nuclear waste
Uh, dump it in some concrete bunker in the middle of a desert?

>>17137135
pretty sure induction motors are from the 1800s too. Also modern ICEs have sophisticated ECUs that were completely absent in engines 70 years ago. I'm not saying electric motors now are the same as they were 200 years ago. I'm just pointing out your dumbass logic and lack of understanding of advancement in ICEs.

>>17137629
ECUs are only the electrical replacement of mechanical controlls.
Also the asynchrone isn´t that old...

>>17135541
Expecting autists to say climate change isn't real. Was surprised.

>>17137688
yes ECUs are a huge advancements because you can have variable injection timings and spark control which believe it or not does in fact change everything. Also if asynchrone you mean asyncrhonous motors or induction motors, then yes they are from the late 1800s.

>>17137986
>variable ignition
>variable injection
That existed in mechanical versions powered by vacuum lines.

>>17135601
Someone on /o/ gets it.

Loom at every failed ev startup, like the cody. They tried to go straight to mass market models and failed

>>17138012
but guess which one is lighter and more variable. Do you really think if it were just the same, automakers would have invested anything at all in developing this technology?

Someone seriously tell me what the efficiency of power generation is because if it's really >40% as was posted earlier what exactly is an electric car offering at all?

>>17135541
kys. literally kys.

kys before you kill the planet, anon. the only way the planet will be saved is if you kys. please do it quick.

>>17137175
>what are electro magnets

>>17137324
Instrument gauges

>>17137384
>software update bricks your car
Nah man, totally not a critical failure

>>17134377
ICE also loses performance over time due wear.

>>17135761
>peak oil by 2030
nigga they've been predicting peak oil is 10-15 years out every year I've been alive. Fuck, the first prediction for peak oil was 1970, and that shit was made in 1956.

GTFO here with that peak oil bullshit lie they're feeding you in eurouniversity.

>>17138571
Did you read the rest of the sentence or just started frothing at the mouth when your eyes saw "peak oil"?

Tesla is built on a ton of bullshit.

>electric cars
Cucking yourself. Losing performance. Can't do any spirited driving. Power bill goes through the roof. Can't do any maintenance.

>self driving
The ultimate cuck technology.

File: tmp_1286-1492903222775-1925166639.jpg (24KB, 480x590px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x590px

>>17137177
>throwaway culture
>vehicles lasting longer than ever

>>17139049
I dunno about you but a boring 40 min commute on a dull highway would be made much more enjoyable by level 4+ autonomy. Reading, checking mail, napping.

But I guess I'm not a "car guy" by your definition.

>>17139121
There was a guy that decided to do just that and watch Harry Potter, he crashed and died

It's why I prefer assistive tech like Distronic better, it doesn't take over by adds a giant safety net while massaging you

>>17139139
>level 4+

please read before replying

>>17139049
>Driving bumper to bumper traffic is what a real mam does

Congrats on being autistic

>>17137324
an accord touring
>~30k + taxes
>~3000 in gas over 5 years
reliable af, max comfy, pretty quick for a big sedan,

>>17139168
you're right, but there is an interesting conundrum here:

autonomy is wonderful for dull driving. But, if everyone uses autonomy, there won't be nearly as much traffic, and thus driving won't have to be so dull


it's something to think about

>>17135756

Tesla has fucking seats that look like they belong in a utility van.

>b-but it has a huge screen in the dash

so what?

>>17139154
Did God Emperor Elon Musk come up with those classifications too?

>>17139188
I was just showing how you used the autopilot death as evidence, where the individual was using autopilot as a level 4 system when he shouldn't. Watching a movie in a Tesla is dumb; even I agree with that.

But in three or so years it'll be perfectly safe.