Tesla Hate Thread - oh and come seethe about EVs in general with me

[DeadwastePrime]

Right so, no. Fast charging murders the battery, its not going to get much better and you are shortening the life of your battery every time you do this.

it does, but youre better off slow charging at home when you have the chance since its better for the battery. the fast chargers are more like "youre at 10% charge and you need to get up to about 85%". i am holding out for those lithium sulfate batteries which would extend range and battery length but that will be a while.

Yep, personally I think we are already here. We'll see if there is pushback in the market to level this off or not.

i mean the parts for older cars since the 90s are still available now since those cars are more common on roads, but maybe 20 to 40 years from now when theyre harder to find? it'll get trickier. its already becoming harder to find car parts from the 60s and 70s

lol no, there are massive logistical and material constraints that will kill this stupid pipe dream dead. Given that EV's can't and will never be able to tow for shit kills this off even more.

dont think they wont be stupid enough to try it. we're talking about the modern government. i doubt they change that drastically in 10 to 15 years

 

[Car Won't Crank]

I don't think this is a cost cutting decision, this stupid class of vehicles "coupe SUVs" has basically zero rearward visibility as a design consequence. The rear window is at a very shallow angle, it's high above the ground, and it's flanked by a kammback.
View attachment 5076212
Unless you put glass in the rear hatch like a first gen insight, you aren't going to see much out of the rear end of a car designed this way, the SUV's seats are in the way of that being a useful option, you basically won't be able to see anything but sky or a big truck out of the rear window of the "coupe SUV". Excessive camera use is an unavoidable consequence of modern automotive design, where visibility seems to not even be a design consideration.

I blame the E71 BMW X6 for that terrible terrible trend that started in 2008.

 

[1994 Honda Civic]

Polestar decided to not even include a rear glass on it's upcoming Polestar 4 model:

View attachment 5075392 View attachment 5075391

Never have I thought that a car company would cost cut in this manner.

That's just Geely/Volvo going towards the logical conclusion of modern automotive design. Not much to do with cost cutting and more to do with following trends. This Evoque from 2013 gives perspective on the matter.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

That's just Geely/Volvo going towards the logical conclusion of modern automotive design. Not much to do with cost cutting and more to do with following trends. This Evoque from 2013 gives perspective on the matter.
View attachment 5076846

The Evoque was designed by David Beckham's wife though so that one example could be chalked up to woman moment and current trends. Pontiac Aztec probably was the progenitor of that smushed rear hatch design.

 

[God's drunkest driver]

The Evoque was designed by David Beckham's wife though so that one example could be chalked up to woman moment and current trends.

I forgot about that. Remember when a female designer ruined the NSX? Managed to look generic and be a busy piece of shit at the same time. The modern angled beltline trend is just awful and the coupe SUVs make it worse.

At least most of polestar's lineup still looks better than Tesla's.

 

[Uber driver reviewer]

Still loving my Model 3 LR

That is all

 

[Chickin BBQ]

Drove a model 3 recently as a rental.
Neat concept, really shitty user interface in general, interior felt like a fucking Kia from 2014.
I will consider owning an EV when I can buy a crate Motor+battery+controller package from a parts store. Not before.

 

[Uber driver reviewer]

Drove a model 3 recently as a rental.
Neat concept, really shitty user interface in general, interior felt like a fucking Kia from 2014.
I will consider owning an EV when I can buy a crate Motor+battery+controller package from a parts store. Not before.

You pretty much can now

 

[Chickin BBQ]

You pretty much can now

What changed? Did GM finally get off their ass in the past two weeks since I last checked?
Because their "crate" setup so far has been vaporware.
Ford sells the motor, but no controllers, and no batteries.
Buying dead teslas and trying to revive them is not a solution, no matter how much Rich Rebuilds posts youtube videos to the contrary.

 

[Surfin' Biiird]

Polestar decided to not even include a rear glass on it's upcoming Polestar 4 model:

View attachment 5075392 View attachment 5075391

Never have I thought that a car company would cost cut in this manner.

>No rear window
>Still rearview mirror
why live?

 

[Tomato flowers]

>No rear window
>Still rearview mirror
why live?

I’m sure it’s just the rear camera view.

 

[Surfin' Biiird]

I’m sure it’s just the rear camera view.

vertigo here we come!

 

[DavidS877]

>No rear window
>Still rearview mirror
why live?

You can't adjust the mirror to see the kids and threaten to stop the car if you don't have a rear view mirror.

 

[The Ugly One]

I don't think this is a cost cutting decision, this stupid class of vehicles "coupe SUVs" has basically zero rearward visibility as a design consequence. The rear window is at a very shallow angle, it's high above the ground, and it's flanked by a kammback.
View attachment 5076212
Unless you put glass in the rear hatch like a first gen insight, you aren't going to see much out of the rear end of a car designed this way, the SUV's seats are in the way of that being a useful option, you basically won't be able to see anything but sky or a big truck out of the rear window of the "coupe SUV". Excessive camera use is an unavoidable consequence of modern automotive design, where visibility seems to not even be a design consideration.

The reason everything is designed like this now is there are only so many ways to minimize aerodynamic drag and meet government fuel economy regulations. Everyone's using the same design & optimization software tools that are used to design aircraft.

 

[God's drunkest driver]

The reason everything is designed like this now is there are only so many ways to minimize aerodynamic drag and meet government fuel economy regulations. Everyone's using the same design & optimization software tools that are used to design aircraft.

You'll have found my denouncement of regulatory creep in my previous posts, but undoubtedly there is no reason to design the "coupe SUV" except stupidity. It doesn't need to exist, it's just a lifted full size sedan at that point, it has none of the extra space of a traditional SUV, it's just a taller car. The eco model BMW sedans for example have comparable Cd to a Tesla 3 despite a more conventional design, they are the most aerodynamic ICE cars on the market, and the horrifically ugly BMW ix somehow achieved the same Cd as a Prius despite its conventional SUV design (modified Kammback). Tesla's CUVs also feature more glass and better all around visibility than a mercedes or polestar coupe SUV, mostly because they don't rake the beltline as much and have a taller greenhouse.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

You'll have found my denouncement of regulatory creep in my previous posts, but undoubtedly there is no reason to design the "coupe SUV" except stupidity.

The design trend is sheer stupidity. Taking a look at the 2023 Benz GLC 300 4matic coupe SUV, it's rated for 20mpg city and 26 mpg highway from its 2.0T engine that makes 255hp. Compare that with an old school BMW E53 X5 3.0, people on the forums have reported 15-17 mpg city and 27 mpg highway. The aerodynamics reason is utter nonsense when a 1990's designed port injected engine making 225hp is able to propel a 4000lbs+ SUV with a practical liftgate trunk maintaining 26/27mpg on the freeway.

 

[Tony Vivaldi]

I don't hate Teslas but I can't stand Tesla drivers. They drive slow and faggy and hold me the fuck up.
Every. Single. Time.

 

[The Ugly One]

You'll have found my denouncement of regulatory creep in my previous posts, but undoubtedly there is no reason to design the "coupe SUV" except stupidity. It doesn't need to exist, it's just a lifted full size sedan at that point, it has none of the extra space of a traditional SUV, it's just a taller car. The eco model BMW sedans for example have comparable Cd to a Tesla 3 despite a more conventional design, they are the most aerodynamic ICE cars on the market, and the horrifically ugly BMW ix somehow achieved the same Cd as a Prius despite its conventional SUV design (modified Kammback). Tesla's CUVs also feature more glass and better all around visibility than a mercedes or polestar coupe SUV, mostly because they don't rake the beltline as much and have a taller greenhouse.

If you don't see the advantage of height, you've never put four-year-olds in a back seat. Which is fine for you, but automakers know who's buying their vehicles.

Compare that with an old school BMW E53 X5 3.0, people on the forums

People on forums aren't government regulatory agencies. Your average auto forum dweller may be smarter than your average EPA bureaucrat, but complying with online forum mileage standards doesn't count for anything.

The design trend is sheer stupidity. Taking a look at the 2023 Benz GLC 300 4matic coupe SUV, it's rated for 20mpg city and 26 mpg highway from its 2.0T engine that makes 255hp. Compare that with an old school BMW E53 X5 3.0, people on the forums have reported 15-17 mpg city and 27 mpg highway. The aerodynamics reason is utter nonsense when a 1990's designed port injected engine making 225hp is able to propel a 4000lbs+ SUV with a practical liftgate trunk maintaining 26/27mpg on the freeway.

The EPA rates the BMW E53 X5 3.0 at 14 city/19 hwy for combined 16 mpg. The Benz is rated at a combined 25 mpg. That +56% improvement is going to go a lot further toward complying with CAFE than doing nothing.

Plus, modern cars have to be heavier to meet crash & emissions requirements.

 

[God's drunkest driver]

If you don't see the advantage of height, you've never put four-year-olds in a back seat. Which is fine for you, but automakers know who's buying their vehicles.

My wife seems to handle the children just fine with her sedan. Height is more of a visibility issue, since everything is a CUV or SUV now the person in the car winds up unable to see shit in the left turn lane. This doesn't change the fact that the coupe SUV is completely pointless, a normal SUV does everything better, looks better, and the aero argument doesn't hold any water when the conventional design of the BMW ix demonstrates that through optimization a typical SUV two box design can somehow be made as aerodynamic as the arch design of a prius. I don't think you'll see every SUV moving toward the arch, I think it's a styling fad, after all there are only a few of them on the market and they're all luxury vehicles.

 

[Car Won't Crank]

People on forums aren't government regulatory agencies. Your average auto forum dweller may be smarter than your average EPA bureaucrat, but complying with online forum mileage standards doesn't count for anything.

I mention forum reports because that's usually real world reporting of fuel economy with the added benefit of knowing extra details like cruise speed and tire/wheel combinations. City economy is where the the X5 shows its age against a modern SUV but the main comparison is that the highway economy isn't too far off from a modern Benz since the topic was about aerodynamics of the coupe vs classical SUV style.