Tesla’s value plunged nearly $200 billion since mid-July – and the EV maker faces a bumpy road ahead::Tesla shares closed Tuesday at just over $233, well down on their 2023 peak of $291.
Tesla’s value plunged nearly $200 billion since mid-July – and the EV maker faces a bumpy road ahead::Tesla shares closed Tuesday at just over $233, well down on their 2023 peak of $291.
deleted by creator
Please list them, and don’t bother with panel gaps that are either fixed for free on the spot or not long after.
Somebody better tell this to Rivian and Polstar or, shit, any. other. manufacturer.
Get back to me when that lawsuit is resolved. I will say, I’m supposed to get 333 miles from my Model 3 LR and it’s closer to 280. There is reserve battery past 0% but we shouldn’t count that.
Yes we all saw the article posted here a couple days ago. Curious, did you see the posts about how there are manual releases easily found and if you can’t find them you’re kiiiiiiiind of an idiot?
Sorry, still cool 2 years later
Another sign you’ve bought into the bullshit. Manual controls override all AP/FSD activity and the drivers were at fault of every single crash. Find me a single instance where the driver was found to interrupt the system and it ignored them.
You’re just admitting that you’re doing the polar opposite of sucking Elon’s dick. You’ve proved you’ve bought every single hit piece that came out. Congrats. I’m going to continue enjoying my marvel of engineering.
People really don’t even understand the whole range thing.
All those multitude of real world tests out there that show a Tesla doesn’t get the advertised range aren’t doing the tests as the EPA tests are defined.
Yes, a Tesla doesn’t get the advertised range when you go out of the test specs, shocking.
The EPA says this is how we’re going to test the car. They even say, you can test it doing a partial test suite, or a full test suite. Tesla does the full test suite, while many others don’t. This costs Tesla more money, but does seems to work out to their advantage.
I don’t doubt that Tesla then went, okay lets design the car (set the gear) to get a good range on the test the EPA is going to use so we can advertise a good number. The EPA set the rules.
I can’t recall if it was the EPA or some other testing agency, but Tesla once even rejected their initial rating saying you did the test wrong and made them re-do the test (a door was left ajar or something), and the retest came out to the number Tesla was expecting and wanted to advertise. As per the other article something also went wrong once and the EPA made them lower it by 3%. So problems can go both ways, and both were fixed.
Aside from Porsche who have a multi gear system in their power train, everyone else has to deal with the problem of a single gear not having the same efficiency across all speeds.
There’s only a few other models out there besides Porsche (who’s different) that meet their claims at 70mph+ tests, which means they did one of two things. They either lowered their EPA approved number and advertise a smaller range than they are
capableallowed, or they’re going to be less efficient elsewhere, but do good at high speeds.If you want to perform better at high speeds (70mph+) , you’re going to perform worse somewhere else in a single gear system, but I imagine most people care about the high speeds, and people don’t seem to care about real world 25-35mph tests where cars go well past their advertised range. I don’t really blame them for this, it’s what people care about.
We really need to get the EPA to change their tests and make everyone do the same test, make the test better reflect real world driving scenarios, and probably make them advertise city/highway/high speed eMPG instead of just the single number.