Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | LanceJones's commentslogin

My 2024 Model 3 Performance regularly sees its EPA rated range.

$1.2M in Canada after provincial and federal luxury sales taxes. For a 5100 pound, sub-300 mile range, mid-performer with 23/24" wheels. All those louvres, ducts, and aerodynamics for a terribly inefficient EV. Disappointing. (edited because i had $1.1M as the final price)

Just 280+ mile EPA range on a 122 kwH battery. 5100 pounds. 2.5s to 60. Not insane by any standard, ICE or EV.

Yeah that's actually rather inefficient. Tesla Model Y has 84kWh battery and a range of 300 miles.

> Yeah that's actually rather inefficient

Unsurprising, for a Ferrari. I suspect it's designed for performance and not efficiency. Atrocious mileage is par for the course in this segment (see the Veyron)


Does it really?

I've done Stockholm - Oslo on a single charge in early winter, which is almost exactly that distance, so I'd say it does! Even kept me nice and toasty along the way!

No, but we're comparing the EPA ranges here, which is the point of them.

The point of the EPA ranges are to be misleading.

The car manufacturers are well aware of what their vehicles achieve in real world usage.

It would be trivial for them to give and prospective buyer indicative ranges for any particular geographical area.


You're missing the point.

The actual number of the EPA range is imaginary, yes. But it's useful for comparisons.

But if we're talking about comparisons between two vehicles, the vehicle with a 122kWh battery and a 280 EPA range will go less far and is much less efficient than the vehicle with a 84kWh batter and a 300 EPA range.


[flagged]


Thanks for the thoughtful, eloquent response.

Not really, no, except in narrow circumstances.

A lot of Ferraris are driven less than 280 miles per year.

They’ve historically had eye watering regular maintenance bills, even outside of them generally having a reputation for being temperamental. Maybe Ferrari will continue pioneering in their own way and make an unreliable and expensive to own EV

The idea that 100s of global pension funds don't do their due diligence when investing 100s of millions or billions of their members' future retirement funds is extremely naive. With sincerity, I hope you can find a way not to be so emotional about what Musk says and be more grounded in what his companies and their employees are doing.


Investing in SpaceX is one thing. Investing in SpaceX that is now merged with several other failed companies that each incur massive yearly additional losses.... let's see how long those funds still hold SpaceX.


Isn't xAI profitable after leasing out its DCs to Anthropic?


Have you ever heard of a Mortgage Backed Security?


or Bespoke Tranche Opportunity, they don't say CDO any more. I mean, it's the same thing, but still.


Some fair points, but Model Y was the #1 selling SUV in China in Feb and Mar, and 2nd place vehicle was almost half the price.


BYD has two SUVs in the ranking, which added together brings them to parity with the Y.

That aside though, in total sales, BYD is selling 2.5x the amount of EVs.

Tesla ranked 9th, behind Toyota and Volkswagen for total sales in Feb and March.

Globally, Tesla has a tight lineup, so there is only one SUV choice. Other brands outsell Tesla model Y, but it's splintered across their many offerings in the SUV space. Tesla really wants you to know that the model Y is the top selling car globally. They don't want you to know that other SUV brands outsell them, but in the form of many different models.

This is exactly the kind of nonsesne flexing I am referring to that comes out of Tesla for the last few years. Things that on the surface seem "wow", but underneath are just shady or misdirection.


Tesla sales numbers are perpetually skewed by their limited model numbers. Other car manufacturers (rightly or wrongly) have many more SKUs, so any one particular version is unlikely to hit the #1 spot.


I really used to enjoy Fred's writing on Electrek. But after the Roadster referral debacle, Fred's tune changed and has gotten more negative... so negative now that you cannot find any positive articles about Musk or Tesla (some articles you might classify as 'neutral'). If you look at comment counts, it's clear Fred is playing to the "I hate Musk" crowd now for clicks (comments and clicks have similar outcomes for Google Adsense). Electrek's other articles' comment counts pale in comparison. So the incentive is pretty obvious now. Too bad.


I find it funny how stealing 500,000 $ from a fan is a "debacle". In most places that would be considered a felony instead of a justification to smear the victim and call them a whiner.


You think $500K was stolen? Hmm, doesn't sound hyperbolic at all...


You are totally right. In accordance with the Tesla Referral Program contract a estimated ~250,000,000 $ in sales were referred to Tesla by major referrers earning those major referrers ~80 free Tesla Roadsters [1], announced as a 250,000 $ value and used a explicit contractual incentive to the program, in accordance with that legal contract. Having engaged in work on behalf of Tesla on the contractual guarantee of compensation and having earned that compensation in accordance with the contract, Tesla legally owes those fans ~20,000,000 $ in aggregate which it has so far rejected compensating for nearly 7 years.

I am not sure what term you use for having people work on your behalf according to the terms of a contract and then not paying the agreed upon compensation, but "theft" or "steal" would be the colloquial term. Only the intentionally biased would claim a trillion dollar company not paying fans for their work in accordance with their own contract is not "stealing" in common parlance.

I am sorry I was downplaying Tesla's bad behavior by just highlighting that individual fans were jilted out of hundreds of thousands of dollars of their work instead of pointing out how they screwed hundreds of their most loyal fans out of tens of millions of dollars of earned compensation. Anything other than praise for such a upstanding company is unwarranted and smearing their victims is the only unbiased move.

[1] https://electrek.co/2019/01/17/tesla-roadster-free-killed-re...


Can you explain the $500k being stolen? All I could find was something about the roadster and some rebate program, but not actual cash being stolen.


Elektrek went from insufferably pro Tesla to insufferably anti Tesla. If you liked it before and not now, your quarrel is with the direction of the propaganda.


Why do you want the articles to be "positive" or "negative"? Why do you not want them to simply be the fact of the matter?

If you want more good news about Tesla then perhaps Tesla should be better run. Perhaps Tesla should abandon their policy of constantly lying. Tesla's been lying continuously about full self-driving for a decade. Tesla lies about dumb things there's no need to lie about like how fast the Cybertruck is:

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/tesla-cybertruck-beast-vs...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0AJmLvKjxw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5J3H8--CQRE

Tesla never ran that quarter mile, a lie which the lead Cybertruck engineer pathetically tried to defend. When even your engineers can't achieve basic honesty then you've got a sick company culture:

https://x.com/wmorrill3/status/1746266437088645551

What "positive" spin do you want to see on these lies?


But also more deaths. It's the delta that's important.


Old people don't go to war, how is that important. All that matters is who has the most 20 year olds they don't care about killing.


$200/mth USD for me. Anthropic's oAuth Max20 subscription via their SDK. I've had several 100M+ token days without even a blip.


There's no need to run local models with OpenClaw. I use Anthropic's oAuth Max20 Plan subscription via their SDK...


It will have simulated gear changes if that helps at all...


To be honest, it may help for the modern Ferrari driver. It doesn't help for those who appreciate the Ferraris from the '90s and before.


> Ferraris from the '90s and before

That was potentially 36 years ago. 36 years from 1990 would have been 1954.

What changed in technology from 1954->1990, vs change in technology from 1990-2026? Quite a lot.


Today's cars are a lot more similar in technology to those of the 1990s than they were to those of the 1950s.


I can fix a 90s car with 2026 car tools, but I can't fix a 2026 car with 90s car tools.

Because of the electronics. They're vastly different, there's tons more, and they're proprietary.


Really? Simulating a transmission has been tried a few times over the last decade, but it's flopped repeatedly as just silly. It's not likely to impress Ferrari buyers.

The only successful vehicle which has that is a driver-training car built in China. It's electric, but has a clutch pedal and shifter which are inputs to the software. You can even "stall the engine".[1]

[1] https://www.jalopnik.com/this-chinese-electric-car-designed-...


Hyundai Ioniq 5 N nailed it perfectly.

I think by simulating a transmission you mean those internal combustion engined cars with CVT transmissions. Those are terrible yes.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: