Official Tesla Model 3 thread

[DaveinOlyWA]

A simple speed reduction, e.g. 80 mph to 55 mph, would result in a much more significant range improvement than wheel covers.

If I was on a highway where the traffic was moving along at 70-80mph, I would definitely NOT slow down to 55mph! That would be highly dangerous in my opinion.

That aside, I think you miss the point. Putting on aero wheel covers for a trip is an extremely easy and no-compromise solution to increasing range (however slight) without adding time to your trip or putting yourself in danger. The fact that you can use them when you need them (and remove them when you don't, if you don't like the looks), is a benefit.

And by the way, this is not a Tesla-specific matter--you can buy aerodynamic covers for probably any wheel--so don't feel you have to put the idea down just because Model 3's come with the cover.

Never been on a highway (including ones in Utah with speed limits of 80 mph) where someone wasn't driving 65

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Oh boy...let me start with this...


Nobody is saying anything about whether you are safer "at or below the limit". It's about the differential between the fastest and the slowest drivers. It's been shown time and again that the safest speed to travel is right around the average speed of the traffic flow (actually even slightly faster, as in 5%). That may be above, at, or below the posted limit. It doesn't matter. The point being is if you are either well above or well below the average flow of traffic, you present a hazard, regardless of what the limit is.

Okay, so now your list of extremely subjective observations (were these first-hand by the way?) I found a few of them kind of interesting...

Studies prove that traffic moving at the relatively same speed fares better and that accidents happen because a handful or a large group are unsatisfied with that method of travel and resort to higher speeds, more frequent lane changes

resulting in more accidents.

so you can promote breaking the law all ya want, but that crap don't fly and never will. We want to know why we die on the highways. YOUR attitude is part of it.

 

[Zythryn]

Oh boy...let me start with this...


Nobody is saying anything about whether you are safer "at or below the limit". It's about the differential between the fastest and the slowest drivers. It's been shown time and again that the safest speed to travel is right around the average speed of the traffic flow (actually even slightly faster, as in 5%). That may be above, at, or below the posted limit. It doesn't matter. The point being is if you are either well above or well below the average flow of traffic, you present a hazard, regardless of what the limit is.

Okay, so now your list of extremely subjective observations (were these first-hand by the way?) I found a few of them kind of interesting...

Studies prove that traffic moving at the relatively same speed fares better and that accidents happen because a handful or a large group are unsatisfied with that method of travel and resort to higher speeds, more frequent lane changes

resulting in more accidents.

so you can promote breaking the law all ya want, but that crap don't fly and never will. We want to know why we die on the highways. YOUR attitude is part of it.

In your first paragraph you seem to be in agreement with the post your quoted. Then in your last, you seem to let loose on them?
Was your last statement referring to someone else?

 

[GRA]

It's been shown time and again that the safest speed to travel is right around the average speed of the traffic flow (actually even slightly faster,

BS if not proven otherwise.
Mathematically, it's nonsense. According to what you said, driving 1-5% faster than traffic is safer. This will end up with unstoppable increase in speed to make the car travel as safe as possible.

Take your time and find few reliable sources (safest driving speed).

Also note my remark on this:

It's about the differential between the fastest and the slowest drivers.

Germany has the highest speed difference between fastest and slowest drivers. 80mph difference between slow (not slowest) and fast (not fastest).
While those specific roads are the safest roads in the world. It's a fact.

The 2013 U.S. rate of 7.1 road fatalities per 1 billion vehicle-km....

In 2014, the autobahn fatality rate of 1.6 deaths per billion travel-kilometres...

Which says nothing about research on the effect on safety of speed differentials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve

 

[lorenfb]

Never been on a highway (including ones in Utah with speed limits of 80 mph) where someone wasn't driving 65

Sounds like you haven't driven in the LA area lately, where you're seldom able to drive 65 or more at any time other than from 11PM to 4AM.

 

[arnis]

Studies prove that traffic moving at the relatively same speed fares better and that accidents happen because a handful or a large group are unsatisfied with that method of travel and resort to higher speeds, more frequent lane changes

resulting in more accidents.

so you can promote breaking the law all ya want, but that crap don't fly and never will. We want to know why we die on the highways. YOUR attitude is part of it.

Fundamentally, that is "groundfloor" reason. Difference in speed results in vehicles approaching to each other. And if passing is not possible, the whole system will move according to the slowest vehicle.
Fortunately, here in EU (most part of it), we know that. For decades. And of course we know solution that works.
And has worked. For decades. So the fact, is there a solution or not, is not debatable. There is a solution to let some vehicles
travel faster and other vehicles travel slower. This is why there are roads where speed difference is 80mph between vehicles.
And everybody is happy and safe.

@EVDRIVER -
Clearly you don't drive on i5 in California. You can actually get sited for driving too far below the flow of traffic in some cases. Your list is a bit silly in many cases but I expected nothing substantial.
Can you prove that you get cited for driving 20mph below traffic in right lane?
Explain the silliness on the list with 3-4 examples.

 

[lpickup]

so you can promote breaking the law all ya want, but that crap don't fly and never will. We want to know why we die on the highways. YOUR attitude is part of it.

Wait a minute, was this comment directed at me?

Like I've said twice now: I am not talking about driving faster (or slower) than any "limit". I am simply saying that driving a lot faster (or slower) than the average flow of traffic (whatever that may be) is dangerous (acknowledging that some people find that difficult to believe by pointing out corner cases such as the Autobahn where perhaps the behavior is expected and people generally follow the rules of pulling to the slow lanes when going slow--something that doesn't really happen reliably in my neck of the woods).

Anyway, if you look at me personally, I'm probably already one of the slower drivers out there, so please don't accuse me of promoting "breaking the law". I personally don't see a need to exceed 70mph, both for efficiency and time reasons, so when the limit is 70mph, that's how fast I'm driving (while plenty of peopple are passing me). I'm also quick to stay to the right except when passing, even though the typical practice on highways around here is to immediately go to the center lane, regardless of how fast you are going. I do admit to slightly exceeding the limit in 45-65 zones, mainly to keep up with the flow. At lower speed zones, and esepcially in neighborhoods, I'm usually right around the limit.

 

[EVDRIVER]

Never been on a highway (including ones in Utah with speed limits of 80 mph) where someone wasn't driving 65

Sounds like you haven't driven in the LA area lately, where you're seldom able to drive 65 or more at any time other than from 11PM to 4AM.

Perhaps you should read
The context just like the op, highways with high speed limits not grid lock LA traffic where you drive. So unless you drive your leaf on the 5 in the middle of CA where average speeds are very high stop implying it’s safe to go 55 with these out of context arguments. People don’t do 80 at the mall parking lot either, now back to M3 discussion.

 

[lpickup]

Tesla produced 9,766 Model 3's in 1Q18, with 8,180 deliveries.

They also reiterated that they will not require an equity or debt raise this year, and reservations levels have remained stable, with dropoff due to delays in general and delays of options.

Tesla continues to target a production rate of approximately 5,000 units per week in about three months, laying the groundwork for Q3 to have the long-sought ideal combination of high volume, good gross margin and strong positive operating cash flow. As a result, Tesla does not require an equity or debt raise this year, apart from standard credit lines.

Net Model 3 reservations remained stable through Q1. The reasons for order cancellation are almost entirely due to delays in production in general and delays in availability of certain planned options, particularly dual motor AWD and the smaller battery pack. As described above, owner happiness with the product is extremely high.

http://ir.tesla.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=1062670

Cue the mandatory comments from shorts pointing out that 8,180 is not 2500 x 13, although as I've said in the past, even if they achieved 2500 per week in the last week of March (which they did not: they stated they produced 2,020), those cars will not finish up production until mid-April and not delivered until late April.

 

[lorenfb]

Never been on a highway (including ones in Utah with speed limits of 80 mph) where someone wasn't driving 65

Sounds like you haven't driven in the LA area lately, where you're seldom able to drive 65 or more at any time other than from 11PM to 4AM.

Perhaps you should read
The context just like the op, highways with high speed limits not grid lock LA traffic where you drive. So unless you drive your leaf on the 5 in the middle of CA where average speeds are very high stop implying it’s safe to go 55 with these out of context arguments. People don’t do 80 at the mall parking lot either, now back to M3 discussion.

Your attempt to obfuscate the fact that Tesla missed their guidance (2500) again on M3 weekly production? It took seven days
to "squeeze" that number (~ 2K)!

https://insideevs.com/tesla-q1-reporting-and-sales/

 

[lpickup]

Postscript:

While we never have EXACT numbers on a month by month basis, if we go by the InsideEVs estimates, there were 3820 Model 3's delivered in March (unless they balance out the JAN and FEB numbers). This now eclipses the previous US monthly record set by a non-Tesla EV (the Chevy Volt in Dec 2016 sold 3,691). Still not ahead of monthly benchmarks set by the Model S and X (5,850 Model S in that same month). Onward and upward!

 

[lpickup]

Your attempt to obfuscate the fact that Tesla missed their guidance (2500) again on M3 weekly production? It took seven days
to "squeeze" that number (~ 2K)!

https://insideevs.com/tesla-q1-reporting-and-sales/

Keep grasping at those tiny little bits of meaningless glimmers of futile hope for your short position.

I suspect you meant to quote my post, not the one you did. If so, then no, I did not make an attempt to obfuscate it. I think I noted it fairly outright:

even if they achieved 2500 per week in the last week of March (which they did not: they stated they produced 2,020)

 

[lorenfb]

Postscript:

While we never have EXACT numbers on a month by month basis, if we go by the InsideEVs estimates, there were 3820 Model 3's delivered in March (unless they balance out the JAN and FEB numbers). This now eclipses the previous US monthly record set by a non-Tesla EV (the Chevy Volt in Dec 2016 sold 3,691). Still not ahead of monthly benchmarks set by the Model S and X (5,850 Model S in that same month). Onward and upward!

InsideEVs this month is quoting production numbers from a Tesla report and not estimating.

https://insideevs.com/tesla-q1-reporting-and-sales/

 

[lorenfb]

Your attempt to obfuscate the fact that Tesla missed their guidance (2500) again on M3 weekly production? It took seven days
to "squeeze" that number (~ 2K)!

https://insideevs.com/tesla-q1-reporting-and-sales/

I suspect you meant to quote my post, not the one you did. If so, then no, I did not make an attempt to obfuscate it. I think I noted it fairly outright:

No. It was directed properly, or I would have corrected it as I did for a minor tweak. I expressed my agreement about your need for speed
up-thread. His post as usual was petty.

 

[EVDRIVER]

Sounds like you haven't driven in the LA area lately, where you're seldom able to drive 65 or more at any time other than from 11PM to 4AM.

Perhaps you should read
The context just like the op, highways with high speed limits not grid lock LA traffic where you drive. So unless you drive your leaf on the 5 in the middle of CA where average speeds are very high stop implying it’s safe to go 55 with these out of context arguments. People don’t do 80 at the mall parking lot either, now back to M3 discussion.

Your attempt to obfuscate the fact that Tesla missed their guidance (2500) again on M3 weekly production? It took seven days
to "squeeze" that number (~ 2K)!

https://insideevs.com/tesla-q1-reporting-and-sales/

Now the speed limit is related to deliveries? You are delusional. Talk about obfuscating!

 

[lpickup]

Postscript:

While we never have EXACT numbers on a month by month basis, if we go by the InsideEVs estimates, there were 3820 Model 3's delivered in March (unless they balance out the JAN and FEB numbers). This now eclipses the previous US monthly record set by a non-Tesla EV (the Chevy Volt in Dec 2016 sold 3,691). Still not ahead of monthly benchmarks set by the Model S and X (5,850 Model S in that same month). Onward and upward!

InsideEVs this month is quoting production numbers from a Tesla report and not estimating.

https://insideevs.com/tesla-q1-reporting-and-sales/

No, I'm talking about the monthly scorecard where they do break it out by month. Yes, they report the exact QUARTERLY numbers from Tesla, but since Tesla does not break down by month, when it comes time to assign numbers for JAN, FEB and MAR, they have to then estimate. They estimated 1875 for JAN and 2485 for FEB, so that leaves 3820 for MAR unless they decide the rebalance those numbers for some reason (although it probably would not make sense to).

 

[lpickup]

Now the speed limit is related to deliveries? You are delusional. Talk about obfuscating!

Well technically speaking, he is right. You did not clearly mention the fact that Tesla missed their quarterly guidance in your post about driving on the I-5. :lol:

 

[RegGuheert]

Tesla reports manufacturing 9766 Model 3s in Q1. This is a bit LOWER than the 10,392 estimated by the Bloomberg Model 3 tracker. As such, it does not seem that the tracker is really a lagging indicator, but rather it seems to be quite close to the actual numbers, at least in this case.

 

[EVDRIVER]

Now the speed limit is related to deliveries? You are delusional. Talk about obfuscating!

Well technically speaking, he is right. You did not clearly mention the fact that Tesla missed their quarterly guidance in your post about driving on the I-5. :lol:

It never ends.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

so you can promote breaking the law all ya want, but that crap don't fly and never will. We want to know why we die on the highways. YOUR attitude is part of it.

Wait a minute, was this comment directed at me?

Like I've said twice now: I am not talking about driving faster (or slower) than any "limit". I am simply saying that driving a lot faster (or slower) than the average flow of traffic (whatever that may be) is dangerous (acknowledging that some people find that difficult to believe by pointing out corner cases such as the Autobahn where perhaps the behavior is expected and people generally follow the rules of pulling to the slow lanes when going slow--something that doesn't really happen reliably in my neck of the woods).

Anyway, if you look at me personally, I'm probably already one of the slower drivers out there, so please don't accuse me of promoting "breaking the law". I personally don't see a need to exceed 70mph, both for efficiency and time reasons, so when the limit is 70mph, that's how fast I'm driving (while plenty of peopple are passing me). I'm also quick to stay to the right except when passing, even though the typical practice on highways around here is to immediately go to the center lane, regardless of how fast you are going. I do admit to slightly exceeding the limit in 45-65 zones, mainly to keep up with the flow. At lower speed zones, and esepcially in neighborhoods, I'm usually right around the limit.

If the shoe doesn't fit, why try it on???