News
Tesla vehicle reviews are pointless…Here’s why
This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
Tesla vehicle reviews are probably one of the most worthless things to read, in my own opinion, especially if they’re coming from a large group or entity with interests that anyone can trace through the money. Earlier this week, Edmunds put up a scathing review of the Model S Plaid, calling it “a waste of money” and saying it was nothing more than a marketing tool to make an aging vehicle relevant once again. Despite these words, which caught the attention of many readers within the first 48 hours, the Edmunds driver couldn’t wipe the large, shining smile from his face as he felt the instant torque of the vehicle take off like a rollercoaster.
For something that is such a waste, it sure provided a lot of enjoyment to the Edmunds staff. Of course, vehicle performance is not necessarily a baseline for whether an automobile is “good” or not. If a car is fast, people will like it because fast cars are just fun to be in, whether you’re a driver or a passenger. However, reviews on electric cars, Teslas in specific, do not get a fair shake, and it’s not necessarily anyone’s fault, per se. Instead, I see it as an opportunity for people to put their opinions out there without speaking in generalities or thinking their point of view is a fact. Of course, you could say the same about this newsletter.
For me, the comprehension of electric cars, Teslas in specific, needs to be examined by someone seasoned and completely understanding what is going on under the hood (I use that term loosely, now) because without the basic comprehension of what you’re driving, you really are not qualified to speak on it. Additionally, whether something is a “waste of money” really comes down to the consumer. If you’re buying a Model S Plaid for the performance statistics, you’re getting the fastest car in the world for millions of dollars less than its competitors. Sure, if you’re buying it for range and a daily driver, it could be considered a “waste” as the Long Range variant is likely a better option. However, some people realize they won’t have their money forever, and the additional $40,000 cost is simply arbitrary in their point of view.
For me, there are just too many factors as to why reviews are pointless when it comes to certain cars, especially with fast ones. I will discuss a few of them here, and I look forward to hearing your point of view with the others.
-->
Credit: Tesla
Internal Interests
Tesla fans are quick to point out when a product gets a negative review or any sort of pushback. Many of them claim inside interests without really doing their own due diligence, claiming that some entities have their pockets lined with oil money or anything else the mind can grasp. Sometimes, however, they’re not far off. CarMax purchased Edmunds back in April, which means that the company is no longer independent and is owned by a large company with ties with Chrysler, Mitsubishi, Toyota, and Nissan.
It is always important to see what interests some entities have when they speak about a car or any product, for that matter. Simply enough, people with the ability to put their name on an article or a video and put it out there for millions of people to digest have a responsibility to remain partial. It doesn’t always work that way.
Opinionated Points on Features
This is one of my biggest points. Edmunds was quick to dismiss the usefulness of the Yoke, claiming that “the Yoke was a Joke.” Yes, they really wrote that on Twitter.
The Tesla Model S Plaid is nothing more than a marketing exercise designed to draw attention to an aging car. Also, the yoke is a joke. Our full review of the fastest car we’ve ever tested: https://t.co/f1SkdDmRhI pic.twitter.com/A1UUKWODEV
— Edmunds (@edmunds) September 7, 2021
The thing is, I have monitored the Yoke since it was going to be included in the Model S, and while I have spoken to numerous government agencies and Tesla employees about the Yoke, the wheel is really personal preference. The car is obviously built for performance, and performance vehicles, especially open-wheeled cars, like F1 series vehicles, use a Yoke for complete control at high speeds. It is likely Tesla didn’t go with the Yoke for this reason, but it may have included it as a hint toward a steering wheel-less cockpit in the future. That’s my idea, anyway, especially as the company surges toward autonomy.
-->I have NEVER come across a single person who has disliked driving the Yoke for what it’s worth.
Of course, a review does include some personal preference, and that’s expected. However, to slash a vehicle in this way that is likely the most advanced car on the market in terms of software, performance, and technology in this way smells of too much opinion, for me. Stick to the facts, is it a good car? Is it functional? Does it do what the automaker said it would do?
Cars are made to be tested individually
The most logical way to know if a car is for you is to drive it yourself. You should never go off of someone else’s opinion completely. It makes no sense to do this. If cars were meant to be bought off of the basis of someone else’s experience, nobody would drive PT Cruisers (they’re horribly ugly), and everyone would drive what someone else wanted them to drive. Let’s not forget: Cars, while a meaningful portion of life because they get us to work, events, and anywhere we need to go, are supposed to be enjoyable and fun. Not one person on this Earth wants to drive a car they hate if they don’t have to. Hell, when my Dad bought me a 2003 Taurus in college because my Jetta died, I hated it. It was like driving a boat. I was embarrassed by the putrid blue color. I hated the seats, the stereo, and in the winter, I had to keep one hand on the driver’s door because the latch wouldn’t work, and the part was on backorder. There is nothing like driving on the interstate to get to class on time and holding the door shut for dear life, hoping you don’t roll out. I had no other choice, I was a broke college kid, and it was a car that got me from Point A to Point B. But I will never again drive a car I hate.
The thing is, someone I went to high school with loved their 2003 Taurus. They talked about its powerful V6 engine and its fine leather interior. It was a car they enjoyed. I am sure it was a nice car, I didn’t like it.
This goes to my point: Just because someone else hates it and thinks it is a pile of junk doesn’t mean it actually is. It’s just an opinion. Do you want to know if a car is good or not? Drive it yourself and tell your friends what you thought of it. Your opinion of the car won’t change theirs.
-->I will say this: It is important to have these pieces of literature to show us the negative portions of a car. Like if the software isn’t great, or the touchscreen is not very responsive, or if the center console doesn’t move properly. Those are understandable pieces of criticism, but none of them are opinionated. If the software isn’t great, people will see that. It might keep them from buying a car prematurely.
With all of that being said, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the Plaid Model S is a great vehicle, and there is other evidence that suggests Tesla has things to work on. Whichever side of the ball you’re on, believe in your opinion, but be open to other’s points as well. Additionally, make the final decision about a car on your own time, don’t go off of someone else’s words. That’s how you end up with something that you really do not enjoy driving.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
-->
Elon Musk
Elon Musk and James Cameron find middle ground in space and AI despite political differences
Musk responded with some positive words for the director on X.
Avatar director James Cameron has stated that he can still agree with Elon Musk on space exploration and AI safety despite their stark political differences.
In an interview with Puck’s The Town podcast, the liberal director praised Musk’s SpaceX achievements and said higher priorities must unite them, such as space travel and artificial intelligence. Musk responded with some positive words for the director on X.
A longtime mutual respect
Cameron and Musk have bonded over technology for years. As far back as 2011, Cameron told NBC News that “Elon is making very strong strides. I think he’s the likeliest person to step into the shoes of the shuttle program and actually provide human access to low Earth orbit. So… go, Elon.” Cameron was right, as SpaceX would go on to become the dominant force in spaceflight over the years.
Even after Musk’s embrace of conservative politics and his roles as senior advisor and former DOGE head, Cameron refused to cancel his relationship with the CEO. “I can separate a person and their politics from the things that they want to accomplish if they’re aligned with what I think are good goals,” Cameron said. Musk appreciated the director’s comments, stating that “Jim understands physics, which is rare in Hollywood.”
Shared AI warnings
Both men have stated that artificial intelligence could be an existential threat to humanity, though Musk has noted that Tesla’s products such as Optimus could usher in an era of sustainable abundance. Musk recently predicted that money and jobs could become irrelevant with advancing AI, while Cameron warned of a deeper crisis, as noted in a Fox News report.
-->“Because the overall risk of AI in general… is that we lose purpose as people. We lose jobs. We lose a sense of, ‘Well, what are we here for?’” Cameron said. “We are these flawed biological machines, and a computer can be theoretically more precise, more correct, faster, all of those things. And that’s going to be a threshold existential issue.”
He concluded: “I just think it’s important for us as a human civilization to prioritize. We’ve got to make this Earth our spaceship. That’s really what we need to be thinking.”
News
Blue Origin announces Super-Heavy New Glenn 9×4 to Rival SpaceX Starship
The announcement followed the company’s successful NG-2 launch on November 13.
Blue Origin has revealed plans to develop New Glenn 9×4, a “super heavy” rocket designed to deliver 70 metric tons to low-Earth orbit and directly compete with SpaceX’s Starship.
The announcement followed the company’s successful NG-2 launch on November 13, which deployed NASA’s ESCAPADE (Escape and Plasma Acceleration Dynamics Explorers) Mars mission and landed the first stage.
Upgraded engines and reusability
As noted in a Universe Today report, Blue Origin will roll out upgraded BE-4 engines producing 640,000 lbf each, up from 550,000 lbf, starting with NG-3. This should boost the New Glenn rocket’s total first-stage thrust to 4.5 million pounds. Upper-stage BE-3U engines are expected to improve from 320,000 lbf to 400,000 lbf over the next few flights as well.
“These enhancements will immediately benefit customers already manifested on New Glenn to fly to destinations including low-Earth orbit, the Moon, and beyond. Additional vehicle upgrades include a reusable fairing to support increased flight rates, an updated lower-cost tank design, and a higher-performing and reusable thermal protection system to improve turnaround time,” Blue Origin noted.
New Glenn “Super Heavy” 9×4
The super-heavy New Glenn 9×4, with nine BE-4s on the booster, four BE-3Us on the upper stage, will feature an 8.7-meter payload fairing. Blue Origin expects New Glenn 9×4 to be capable of transporting 70 metric tons to LEO, 14 tons to GSO, and 20 tons to trans-lunar injection, as noted by the company in a blog post. This is very impressive, as New Glenn 9×4’s capacity exceeds Falcon Heavy, SpaceX’s largest rocket available to consumers today. Falcon Heavy is capable of carrying up to 64 metric tons to low Earth orbit in a fully expendable configuration.
-->That being said, SpaceX’s Starship’s capacity is extremely impressive. As per SpaceX, Starship is designed to be capable of carrying up to 100-150 metric tonnes to orbit in its fully reusable configuration. At its expendable configuration, Starship’s capacity enters unheard-of territory, with SpaceX stating that the vehicle could transport 250 metric tonnes of cargo.
News
Tesla FSD approved for testing in Nacka, Sweden, though municipality note reveals aggravating detail
Nacka, Sweden, a municipality just a few miles from Stockholm, has given its approval for FSD tests.
Tesla has secured approval for FSD testing in an urban environment in Sweden. As per recent reports from the Tesla community, Nacka, Sweden, a municipality just a few miles from Stockholm, has given its approval for FSD tests.
A look at the municipality’s note regarding FSD’s approval, however, reveals something quite aggravating.
FSD testing approval secured
As per Tesla watcher and longtime shareholder Alexander Kristensen, Nacka is governed by the Moderate Party. The shareholder also shared the municipality’s protocol notes regarding approval for FSD’s tests.
“It is good that Nacka can be a place for test-driving self-driving cars. This is future technology that can both facilitate mobility and make transportation cheaper and more environmentally friendly,” the note read.
The update was received positively by the Tesla community on social media, as it suggests that the electric vehicle maker is making some legitimate headway in releasing FSD into the region. Sweden has been particularly challenging as well, so securing approval in Nacka is a notable milestone for the company’s efforts.
-->Aggravating details
A look at the notes from Nacka shows that FSD’s proposed tests still met some opposition from some officials. But while some critics might typically point to safety issues as their reasons for rejecting FSD, those who opposed the system in Nacka openly cited Tesla’s conflict with trade union IF Metall in their arguments. Fortunately, Nacka officials ultimately decided in Tesla’s favor as the company’s issues with the country’s unions are a completely different matter.
“The left-wing opposition (S, Nackalistan, MP and V) voted no to this, referring to the fact that the applicant company Tesla is involved in a labor market conflict and does not want to sign a collective agreement. We believe that this is not an acceptable reason for the municipality to use its authority to interfere in a labor law conflict.
“Signing a collective agreement is not an obligation, and the company has not committed any crime. The municipality should contribute to technological development and progress, not work against the future,” the note read.
Elon Musk and James Cameron find middle ground in space and AI despite political differences
Blue Origin announces Super-Heavy New Glenn 9×4 to Rival SpaceX Starship
