Tesla Model X

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
GRA said:
Glad it works for you. Personally, that's way too much unnecessary dwell time for me on my typical road trips.
I suppose everyone has to make their own personal choice as to how much inconvenience is tolerable in order to use an EV for long road trips. Even if every fuel stop already takes at least half an hour because of kids, etc., a downside of relying on Superchargers today is that they aren't everywhere that one can currently find gasoline. As more fast chargers come online, they'll better correspond with our human pitstop needs, but that'll take time.

The way I see it is that we aren't exactly out on the road all of the time, so a bit of added inconvenience from time to time seems like a small price to pay for the pleasure of driving electric and to reduce fossil fuel dependency. I like the spirit of the couple from Victoria, BC who just drove their Model X all the way across Canada (see http://TeslaXCanada.com), with huge gaps in the Supercharger network, towing a camping trailer. While I'm not saying that everyone needs to tolerate the many extra hours of en-route charging that they required, not to mention spend north of $100K on a Model X, it's great that there are people who are willing to be pioneers and early adopters. The more, the merrier!

Personally, even though I'm not a super frequent poster here, I'm pretty sure that I spend more time on EV forums than I do charging our range-degraded 2011 LEAF. And we've made a number of 150 - 200 mile roundtrips in recent months, down from 6100' to near sea level and back up. Rather than simply waiting around at chargers, I suppose one option could be to abstain from visiting forums (or some other, preferred Internet time suck) for a week or two prior to each road trip, then use the charging stops to catch up. ;)
 
abasile said:
GRA said:
Glad it works for you. Personally, that's way too much unnecessary dwell time for me on my typical road trips.
I suppose everyone has to make their own personal choice as to how much inconvenience is tolerable in order to use an EV for long road trips. Even if every fuel stop already takes at least half an hour because of kids, etc., a downside of relying on Superchargers today is that they aren't everywhere that one can currently find gasoline. As more fast chargers come online, they'll better correspond with our human pitstop needs, but that'll take time.
Indeed, we all differ in our toleration for inconvenience. I don't have kids and my pit stops are typically spaced by the capacity of my still in good condition bladder. Every four hours on a typical trip is acceptable, although if necessary I can go 6-8 in my current car (which is usually more important for being able to make a round trip without needing to pay mountain monopoly prices for fuel en route). The range is useful not just for going non-stop, but also, as you say, when combined with multiple options for charging gives me the choice of where I stop to eat. If I can get to Lee Vining non-stop, I can choose to eat in Oakdale, Groveland, Tuolumne Meadows or Lee Vining if desired, assuming that QCs will eventually be available in all of them (not likely in Tuolumne). It's still a lot less convenient than a five minute stop for fuel anywhere and eat whenever/wherever/however I please, but acceptable.

abasile said:
The way I see it is that we aren't exactly out on the road all of the time, so a bit of added inconvenience from time to time seems like a small price to pay for the pleasure of driving electric and to reduce fossil fuel dependency. I like the spirit of the couple from Victoria, BC who just drove their Model X all the way across Canada (see http://TeslaXCanada.com), with huge gaps in the Supercharger network, towing a camping trailer. While I'm not saying that everyone needs to tolerate the many extra hours of en-route charging that they required, not to mention spend north of $100K on a Model X, it's great that there are people who are willing to be pioneers and early adopters. The more, the merrier!
Trips taken once or occasionally for the adventure of it are fine, but not practical usage for most people given more convenient, faster and often less expensive options. In my case, patience has never been a strong suit, and since my recreational time is limited until I retire, wasting as little of it as possible just getting to where I recreate is a priority. On my most recent trip I spent from 1/2 to 25 hours parked at five trailheads, none of which had any electric service. The lack of electric infrastructure is typical of the places I recreate. Without conveniently located en-route QCs, even Gen 2 BEVs simply aren't practical for me.

I did the early adopter bit with its attendant high costs and (lesser) inconvenience with RE, and have no desire to do so again with EVs; I'll leave that to others who possess both the money and motivation. Until they reach the stage of general practicality, with adequate range and plentiful places to charge where I need them, I'll rely primarily on the small daily inconvenience of commuting by bike and walking for errands along with living 'smaller' to reduce my fossil fuel use.

abasile said:
Personally, even though I'm not a super frequent poster here, I'm pretty sure that I spend more time on EV forums than I do charging our range-degraded 2011 LEAF. And we've made a number of 150 - 200 mile roundtrips in recent months, down from 6100' to near sea level and back up. Rather than simply waiting around at chargers, I suppose one option could be to abstain from visiting forums (or some other, preferred Internet time suck) for a week or two prior to each road trip, then use the charging stops to catch up. ;)
:D Not really an option for me at the moment, as cell or wi-fi service is just as lacking as any other type of electric infrastructure where I typically am on trips. I did read and post some from the June Lake library on my recent trip, as I killed a couple of hours waiting for a trail to get some shade so it would be an enjoyable hike instead of a re-enactment of the Bataan Death March ;) , but that was in the nature of an exception that proves the rule.
 
GRA said:
Trips taken once or occasionally for the adventure of it are fine, but not practical usage for most people given more convenient, faster and often less expensive options.
If one does, say, a 1000 mile trip every few months or so, resulting in as much as a few additional hours of wait time, that can still be quite tolerable to many people when balanced with the advantages of driving an EV. That pales in comparison with the amount of time most people spend in city/suburban traffic, or in countless other mundane activities. Most QC locations do have good cellular data coverage, if not wifi, and a great many of us now have very functional tablets and/or phones. So it really isn't that big a deal for many of us to wait for charging here and there, when away from home. Given appropriate carbon/pollution pricing, lower-cost batteries, and widespread QC, I think this will become the norm.

GRA said:
Without conveniently located en-route QCs, even Gen 2 BEVs simply aren't practical for me.
That's true for me as well. Thankfully, the SoCal routes that we most frequently travel have QCs, as do the longer-distance corridors that we most care about, like US-395, I-15, and I-40 (Tesla Superchargers, anyway). In California, I suppose that some of the smaller, cross-Sierra routes will take longer to fill in. Lack of destination charging (i.e., at trailheads) is less of an issue where there are QCs en route, of course.

Of course, plenty of people only use their cars for shorter regional trips wherein the range of a Tesla is scarcely limiting at all.
 
Upgrading Autopilot: Seeing the World in Radar - The Tesla Team September 11, 2016

https://www.tesla.com/blog/upgrading-autopilot-seeing-world-radar

<snip>
The first part of solving that problem is having a more detailed point cloud. Software 8.0 unlocks access to six times as many radar objects with the same hardware with a lot more information per object.

The second part consists of assembling those radar snapshots, which take place every tenth of a second, into a 3D "picture" of the world. It is hard to tell from a single frame whether an object is moving or stationary or to distinguish spurious reflections. By comparing several contiguous frames against vehicle velocity and expected path, the car can tell if something is real and assess the probability of collision.

The third part is a lot more difficult. When the car is approaching an overhead highway road sign positioned on a rise in the road or a bridge where the road dips underneath, this often looks like a collision course. The navigation data and height accuracy of the GPS are not enough to know whether the car will pass under the object or not. By the time the car is close and the road pitch changes, it is too late to brake.

This is where fleet learning comes in handy. Initially, the vehicle fleet will take no action except to note the position of road signs, bridges and other stationary objects, mapping the world according to radar. The car computer will then silently compare when it would have braked to the driver action and upload that to the Tesla database. If several cars drive safely past a given radar object, whether Autopilot is turned on or off, then that object is added to the geocoded whitelist.

When the data shows that false braking events would be rare, the car will begin mild braking using radar, even if the camera doesn't notice the object ahead. As the system confidence level rises, the braking force will gradually increase to full strength when it is approximately 99.99% certain of a collision. This may not always prevent a collision entirely, but the impact speed will be dramatically reduced to the point where there are unlikely to be serious injuries to the vehicle occupants.
<snip>
 
The X may be AWD, but it seems it is not-quite-ready for the Rubicon Trail...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mINd05ibFEE

Tesla Model X Snaps Right-Front Wheel & Axle On Curb

...We're not sure exactly what happened and why the Model X took such a wide line through the intersection, but the left turn does look a little too sudden, so maybe it was a last-second decision and the car simply ended up clipping the curb.

Whatever the reason, according to the video's description, the Model X limped away with serious damage to its front wheel and axle, where the former actually snapped upon impact...
http://www.carscoops.com/2016/09/tesla-model-x-snaps-right-front-wheel.html
 
edatoakrun said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mINd05ibFEE

Tesla Model X Snaps Right-Front Wheel & Axle On Curb
http://www.carscoops.com/2016/09/tesla-model-x-snaps-right-front-wheel.html
Its a bit hard to see, but it appears that the Tesla may have hit the curb right at the culvert. Those steel angle irons over culverts tend to be quite a bit less forgiving than normal curbs.
 
palmermd said:
I don't understand what is so fascinating about a bad driver. I've seen plenty of bad drivers hit the curbs...no need to dissect the event.
Wonder what hitting the curb cost to repair, ~$20 or $30 K?

Could it even be a total loss?

I was wondering how this guy seems to be able to find so many photos of Teslas in Junkyards missing one or more wheels...

https://electrek.co/2016/06/13/tesla-fale-complaints-suspension-nhtsa-keef-wivaneff/

Apparently, The X design is susceptible to problems due to bad parkers, as well as bad drivers.


Don’t close your Tesla Model X Falcon Wing Door while parked on a hill [Video]


Just when you thought issues related to Tesla’s infamous Model X Falcon Wing Doors may have been solved, the folks behind popular podcast Talking Tesla have identified yet another potential problem. As it would appear, the Model X doors don’t like to be closed while parked on a hill. Host Mel Herbert demonstrates an odd case whereby closing his Model X front door will impact the Falcon Wing Door while the vehicle is parked on a slope...
Despite being an eye sore when doors are misaligned, we haven’t known of any cases where the Model X doors will impact one another, until now...
http://www.teslarati.com/dont-close-tesla-model-x-falcon-wing-doors-parked-hill-video/
 
17K miles on my X in 7 months. Headed on another roadtrip soon that will add another 1.5K or so. Hope to get v8 while on the roadtrip so I can experience the difference going there vs coming back. I probably have 13K AutoSteer/Pilot miles under my belt. Fantastic AS/P experience.

Image: i.imgur.com/Kav4eAs.png
Kav4eAs.png
 
Maybe Telsa's new slogan for the X will be, the ~same range as a Chevy Bolt for more than twice the price...

Farewell Tesla Model X 60D (60 kWh), you’ve become a rare breed

It wasn’t long ago when Tesla announced that it would lower the entry point of the Model X by making available a 60 kWh battery pack...

However, just four months after the announcement was first made, and weeks after a handful of Model X 60D vehicles were delivered, Tesla has removed the 60 kWh option from the Model X online Design Studio. In its place as the new entry level variant is the Model X 75D, with a base price of $85,500 or $10,000 over the previous 60D....
http://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-x-60d-60-kwh-battery-discontinued/
 
TonyWilliams said:
dgpcolorado said:
They needed some help with efficient Supercharging theory (driving at 85 is not the fastest way to make a trip!)

I beg to differ. Here's my comparisons with Superchargers 125 miles apart with 120kW available, burning the battery down to 10% SOC:

SPEED ------------------55mph --------- 90mph

CONSUMPTION - 3.8miles/kWh --- 2.0miles/kWh

kWh BURNED ----- 32.9kWh ----------62.5kWh

TRAVEL TIME ------- 2.3 hours ------ 1.4 hours

CHARGE TIME------ 0.4hours -------- 0.8 hours


Total Time Enroute -- 2.7 hours ---- 2.2 hours every 125 miles

must be nice. I know people who change lanes roughly 20-25 times PER MILE and complain because they can't average 70 mph...
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
must be nice. I know people who change lanes roughly 20-25 times PER MILE and complain because they can't average 70 mph...
This is where autopilot is going to improve traffic patterns.
I so want adaptive cruise control on my next vehicle.
 
smkettner said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
must be nice. I know people who change lanes roughly 20-25 times PER MILE and complain because they can't average 70 mph...
This is where autopilot is going to improve traffic patterns.
I so want adaptive cruise control on my next vehicle.

not only would it be cheaper but it would be much more profitable to enforce the laws stating travel right except to pass...
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
smkettner said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
must be nice. I know people who change lanes roughly 20-25 times PER MILE and complain because they can't average 70 mph...
This is where autopilot is going to improve traffic patterns.
I so want adaptive cruise control on my next vehicle.

not only would it be cheaper but it would be much more profitable to enforce the laws stating travel right except to pass...
If the freeway is packed pretty solid in all five lanes it is the person darting in and out that causes more disruption.

Worst is when they cut off a big truck that takes several miles to get back up to speed.

Out on the open road I agree with passing and getting back over. Not going to happen on a 10+ lane packed freeway around here.

Yes I believe autopilot will help the person's response time to speed up when traffic permits.
 
Nissan LEAF Has Way More Cargo Room Than Tesla Model X – Video:
http://insideevs.com/nissan-leaf-way-cargo-room-tesla-model-x-video/

The problem appears to the be 2nd row seats that can't (?) be removed nor folded down, which limits how long an item can be to fit completely inside. Interestingly, one of the comments pointed out http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=37423&id=37067&id=37463 which (under the Spec tab) shows the Model X having less passenger and luggage volume than the Prius v wagon.
 
cwerdna said:
Nissan LEAF Has Way More Cargo Room Than Tesla Model X – Video:
http://insideevs.com/nissan-leaf-way-cargo-room-tesla-model-x-video/

The problem appears to the be 2nd row seats that can't (?) be removed nor folded down, which limits how long an item can be to fit completely inside. Interestingly, one of the comments pointed out http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=37423&id=37067&id=37463 which (under the Spec tab) shows the Model X having less passenger and luggage volume than the Prius v wagon.
One interesting thing about the video is the claim by Tesla that a 5-passenger version is being developed which will eliminate the problem, presumably by allowing the 2nd row seats to fold. The lack of folding 2nd row seats was one of the major mistakes Tesla made in designing the X, opting for 'wow' over utility.
 
When the Model X was introduced, Musk derided the Honda Odyssey as part of the reveal. Having seen the car in person I wonder if they wouldn't have done better to take inspiration from the HO, as the third row seating is useless and there is no cargo versatility. Frankly I don't know why anyone would even consider it.
To paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen, Honda Odyssey was a friend of mine, and you sir are no Honda Odyssey.
 
Back
Top