Model 3 UK orders.

[Kolbenkopp]

Assume that's unlocked via software?

[RobDickinson]

Kolbenkopp said:

Assume that's unlocked via software?

yep

[Heres Johnny]

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

[RobDickinson]

Heres Johnny said:

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

Yes the ones they had use of for free whilst knowing they didnt pay for them and shouldnt have had them.

[jamoor]

Heres Johnny said:

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

Think of it as a free trial that you get with software.

[Leon R]

RobDickinson said:

Heres Johnny said:

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

Yes the ones they had use of for free whilst knowing they didnt pay for them and shouldnt have had them.

To be clear the hardware is physically installed in the cars but Tesla released software preventing people from using them but those same people can pay Tesla money to get the software removed? Do they do this with other things?

[RobDickinson]

Leon R said:

Do they do this with other things?

Yes.

Its a gamble from tesla that they will recoup the costs over time and by fitting to all cars it makes the per unit cost cheaper. £300 for heated rear seats isnt a bad price when you consider Porsche charge about that for an mp3 of engine noise on the Taycan

Edited by RobDickinson on Saturday 15th February 22:50

[Durzel]

Leon R said:

To be clear the hardware is physically installed in the cars but Tesla released software preventing people from using them but those same people can pay Tesla money to get the software removed? Do they do this with other things?

It’s not unusual. Commonplace in networking equipment, for example.

[Mr E]

Leon R said:

Do they do this with other things?

Everything.

Build one car. Charge for features. It’s the future.

[ZesPak]

Leon R said:

To be clear the hardware is physically installed in the cars but Tesla released software preventing people from using them but those same people can pay Tesla money to get the software removed? Do they do this with other things?

Isn't it commonplace? Maybe not exactly the same, but a lot of cars just need a button for certain functionality or a stalk for for example cruise control, everything else is in there. Since Tesla's have nearly no buttons it's a software button that needs to be enabled instead of a hardware one, but the idea remains the same.

[Witchfinder]

Audi are now doing "feature on demand" with their LED headlights that are software-locked matrix lights. For stuff like that, it makes perfect sense to have a single, more cost effective hardware specification.

[Heres Johnny]

Leon R said:

RobDickinson said:

Heres Johnny said:

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

Yes the ones they had use of for free whilst knowing they didnt pay for them and shouldnt have had them.

To be clear the hardware is physically installed in the cars but Tesla released software preventing people from using them but those same people can pay Tesla money to get the software removed? Do they do this with other things?

We know they install common parts as it makes life easier and software control them, Autopilot hardware is another example where its always included since it came out.

BMW do the same with things like carplay - its a feature many owners could activate over the air, whats a little different here is that Tesla screwed up the config delivering cars with features enabled they didn't intend and rather than take it on the chin they switch them off and now ask the owners to pay to have them turned back on.

Its a variation of the case in the US with autopilot - the car did something that Tesla thought it shouldn't do so Tesla retrospectively took it away. The implications are now that if you went to buy a car you simply can't trust what the car does when you look at it as Tesla may decide thats not what the original advertised spec was and remove the feature over the air. Tesla are even writing into their warranty documents that they can take performance and battery capacity away which changes the original spec without any implications on them. Their justification is to reduce warranty incidents - but warranty incidents are (or should be) Teslas problem not the owners. Now it seems Tesla are making owners take the heat for warranty problems.

[Mikehig]

Heres Johnny said:

Leon R said:

RobDickinson said:

Heres Johnny said:

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

Yes the ones they had use of for free whilst knowing they didnt pay for them and shouldnt have had them.

To be clear the hardware is physically installed in the cars but Tesla released software preventing people from using them but those same people can pay Tesla money to get the software removed? Do they do this with other things?

We know they install common parts as it makes life easier and software control them, Autopilot hardware is another example where its always included since it came out.

BMW do the same with things like carplay - its a feature many owners could activate over the air, whats a little different here is that Tesla screwed up the config delivering cars with features enabled they didn't intend and rather than take it on the chin they switch them off and now ask the owners to pay to have them turned back on.

Its a variation of the case in the US with autopilot - the car did something that Tesla thought it shouldn't do so Tesla retrospectively took it away. The implications are now that if you went to buy a car you simply can't trust what the car does when you look at it as Tesla may decide thats not what the original advertised spec was and remove the feature over the air. Tesla are even writing into their warranty documents that they can take performance and battery capacity away which changes the original spec without any implications on them. Their justification is to reduce warranty incidents - but warranty incidents are (or should be) Teslas problem not the owners. Now it seems Tesla are making owners take the heat for warranty problems.

This looks like a potential can of worms.
One possible problem comes to mind straight away. What happens if one of these "stealth" pieces of kit which has not been enabled causes a problem - where does the owner stand wrt warranty?
On their form so far, would Tesla say the part was not paid for so is not covered?
OTOH the owner would say that, as it was not useable, why should he/she pay for any repair?

[Durzel]

Heres Johnny said:

We know they install common parts as it makes life easier and software control them, Autopilot hardware is another example where its always included since it came out.

BMW do the same with things like carplay - its a feature many owners could activate over the air, whats a little different here is that Tesla screwed up the config delivering cars with features enabled they didn't intend and rather than take it on the chin they switch them off and now ask the owners to pay to have them turned back on.

Its a variation of the case in the US with autopilot - the car did something that Tesla thought it shouldn't do so Tesla retrospectively took it away. The implications are now that if you went to buy a car you simply can't trust what the car does when you look at it as Tesla may decide thats not what the original advertised spec was and remove the feature over the air. Tesla are even writing into their warranty documents that they can take performance and battery capacity away which changes the original spec without any implications on them. Their justification is to reduce warranty incidents - but warranty incidents are (or should be) Teslas problem not the owners. Now it seems Tesla are making owners take the heat for warranty problems.

Think of it like a trial period.

I can see that coming to cars too as more and more features are driven by software. As has been said having a common loom etc installed across all cars might mean a lower cost to the manufacturer than building to order. I imagine it will only really be physically distinct add-ons (e.g. active suspension vs standard shocks/springs) that would end up being different between cars.

I don’t really know how abut SR+ owners can have cause for complaint for losing something they never paid for in the first place and only had due to a configuration error.

[Heres Johnny]

Durzel said:

Heres Johnny said:

We know they install common parts as it makes life easier and software control them, Autopilot hardware is another example where its always included since it came out.

BMW do the same with things like carplay - its a feature many owners could activate over the air, whats a little different here is that Tesla screwed up the config delivering cars with features enabled they didn't intend and rather than take it on the chin they switch them off and now ask the owners to pay to have them turned back on.

Its a variation of the case in the US with autopilot - the car did something that Tesla thought it shouldn't do so Tesla retrospectively took it away. The implications are now that if you went to buy a car you simply can't trust what the car does when you look at it as Tesla may decide thats not what the original advertised spec was and remove the feature over the air. Tesla are even writing into their warranty documents that they can take performance and battery capacity away which changes the original spec without any implications on them. Their justification is to reduce warranty incidents - but warranty incidents are (or should be) Teslas problem not the owners. Now it seems Tesla are making owners take the heat for warranty problems.

Think of it like a trial period.

I can see that coming to cars too as more and more features are driven by software. As has been said having a common loom etc installed across all cars might mean a lower cost to the manufacturer than building to order. I imagine it will only really be physically distinct add-ons (e.g. active suspension vs standard shocks/springs) that would end up being different between cars.

I don’t really know how abut SR+ owners can have cause for complaint for losing something they never paid for in the first place and only had due to a configuration error.

If it was promoted as a tral and clear thats what it was, then thats no issue

As pointed out before, the spec didn't explicitly state it didn't have rear heating, in the same way the spec didn't explicitly state that it did or didn't have a whole bunch of stuff. It was working on the car. You can buy a used MS or MX with EAP and a week later half those features disappear because Tesla didn't adjust the car before sending it to auction.

So imagine going to buy a used car, one 2 years old, and the car had a bunch of features on that car when you looked at it that worked. You buy the car, get home, a few months later they disappear, you talk to the dealer and they have no idea why they've gone, you talk to Tesla and they say "we've decided to take it away as it was not on the car, or not transferable or XYZ.." and then "if you want it back again pay us $$$$$"

Worst still, buy a NEW car from Tesla, and in 6 months time Tesla determine that the charge speed they told you about they now know to be damaging to the battery so they slash the charge rate. And that 300 mile range they said it had, well thats damaging too, so they reduce it to 250 miles. Totally permissible in their warranty documentation, and owners will have to fight them in court

So ANYONE looking to buy a Tesla today, look at the warranty document and see if you're happy with what Tesla can do. These are not just mumble jumble legal words that will never be put into practice, these are words added to the warranty document because they ARE happening.

[saaby93]

Leon R said:

RobDickinson said:

Heres Johnny said:

That will be the same heated rear seats that early SR+ owners had for a number of months before Tesla took them away in a software update saying they should never have had the.and are now selling back to them?

Yes the ones they had use of for free whilst knowing they didnt pay for them and shouldnt have had them.

To be clear the hardware is physically installed in the cars but Tesla released software preventing people from using them but those same people can pay Tesla money to get the software removed? Do they do this with other things?

Isnt it possible to make the seats work by adding a switch rather than software?

[kusuka]

I don't understand why Tesla doesn't sell Standart Range (not plus) version?
It would be cheaper than £40k and we would be able to omit the luxury car tax for the following years.
They could've sell the rest of the battery as an upgrade later on. They've done similar things in the Germany and Canada.

Has anyone tried ordering the Standart Range (not plus) version on the phone?

[RobDickinson]

They only sell that version in USA, and you have to call up to order. Its a shame but they are selling all the higher cost versions they can make so not unexpected

[Witchfinder]

kusuka said:

I don't understand why Tesla doesn't sell Standart Range (not plus) version?

They'd make little or no profit on it.

[Durzel]

There’s enough demand as there is.