Tesla Talk

You've answered your own question.

You can always dream up a scenario where that extra 10-20% efficiency that a Tesla has, avoided a charging stop on some long journey but that's not an everyday thing and for long journeys you will need to stop anyway so does the extra 5-10mins on the charger really matter. I'd argue not and while you and me can run some numbers and figure out running costs and know the difference between a kW and a kWh the majority out there have no clue and dont want to have a clue.... back to my "keep it simple" point. Your average punter doesn't want to be interacting with an iPad to operate the car... they want simple point and go.

Anyway, the point here isn't to say that VW is better than Tesla or vice versa. The point was that they both have their selling points and the software issues on VW are largely resolved now. Its not brilliant software but its stable and better in places than Tesla and worse in others.

After that, people will buy whichever car floats their boat. There is no such thing as "the best EV" as its subjective, having the fastest charging car or whatever metric you pick, might matter alot to one person but be irrelevant to another.

@KCross - for sure.

I like getting from A to B quickly so it isn't in my nature to drive under the speed limit on motorways. I rarely make trips long enough to having to charge (motorway range of 300km helps) and I'd rather slow down to 100km/h on these rare occasions so I can come home without the need to charge

@josip - that is very good going. I presume you drive at about 100km/h on motorways to get that 500km range potential?

Still very good going even in ideal summer conditions. 240km at 120km/h plus 100km at 100km/h plus another up to 60km at local speeds. That's 400km and you still have 20% left, so effectively a 500km real life (ideal conditions) range.

A friend of mine who's anti-EV and very anti-Tesla works for Aviva. He was saying that autopilot is so dangerous and has caused so many crashes that Aviva are sending letters to all the Tesla drivers they insure asking them to be extra vigilant when using it or to not use it at all. Can anyone here confirm? Obviously, I had nothing to go on when he said this but it doesn't sound right to me.

He also said EVs are generally more dangerous than ICE cars because of the extra torque and acceleration. Apparently, EV premiums will be shooting up as a result of this too.

Edited: Misspelled Aviva twice 😅

I'd say that's about as nonsense as it gets tbh, either your friend is troilling or you are

I pay €480 fully comprehensive with all options ticked, full NCB protection, etc. on my 2017 Tesla Model S with full self driving, insured value €49k

I think he's anti-Tesla because of Musk rather than the company itself.

No, he could definitely get one if he wanted, he drives a nice diesel estate and his wife got a new mini a few years back. He says that he'll consider an EV when the range is decent, although he doesn't have an exact number of what range he wants. He also said that he's under no illusions about EVs being better for the environment when "most of our electricity comes from imported gas and coal". I think he's a lost cause. 😂

When I first called my insurance at the time I was considering buying a Tesla, the lady at other end of the phone made a deep sigh noise, then proclaimed that Teslas go on fire a lot so would be expensive to insure..

I asked her to check her facts and come back to me with a quote. I got a call from another person, stating my premium would not change.🙄

Once again, I'll ask you to provide Teslas intervention numbers. Without those, the accidents with FSD engaged figures are literally meaningless.

Your constant parroting of Elon's claim that FSD is safer than humans is as reckless as he himself is. Tesla have every reason to bend the truth on their figures because it's so important to their brand perception and stock value, hence Musk himself saying Tesla as a company is worthless without FSD.

And the NHTSA is currently investigating Tesla. The NHTSA has so far discovered that FSD is configured to disconnect when a crash is unavoidable. Now I am sure you will insist that isn't so they can claim the driver was in control at the time of impact, not FSD, and is therefore responsible, but it looks suspicious to me.

Tesla's FSD safety claims are probably not truthful because this FSD disconnection before impact feature would doubtlessly be making the data they are manipulating, a complete nonsense.