Tesla facts + Oatmeal guy is a zealous fanboy = double dose of awesome

[Thorin]

Ball joints and axles exist on both IC and electric cars, so this is not an expense you'd attribute to one but not the other.

IC engine vs electric motor repairs, similar on both IC and electric cars so again attribute to both.

Head and pistons are part of the IC engine, that's like saying you might need to replace the bushings or windings on the electric motor, so again similar cost if something breaks on either car.

Transmission - yes, IC engines use transmissions whereas Teslas don't appear to (not sure about other pure-electrics).  I still don't understand why you wouldn't use a transmission to gear down the electric motor so it doesn't have to spin as fast and use as much electricity to provide the same forward motion.  Or maybe Teslas do have transmissions that I just don't know about yet.  Or maybe I'm not understanding electricity usage vs heat production in the electric motors that they use (there was talk of a liquid-cooled electric motor at some point, I don't think they went with that?).

Battery pack - this is an electric-only repair that has no real counterpart in the IC engine (fuel tank, fuel pump, maybe?) that has a clear shelf-life and that all the real EV discussions over the years have brought up.  Batteries degrade, and the battery packs are still expensive as all get-up (although much cheaper than the battery technology that was used in GM's EV1 program).

---

We could keep bringing up little things here and there, and I could keep countering them, but I don't think my basic point (Teslas are not yet a good way to spend your money compared to similar, non-cachet-brand, cars) has been refuted.  If you think I'm wrong, show the math and maybe you'll change my mind.  But at present, it's hard to justify $5,000 at signing and $3,900 at delivery and $1,400 a month to lease (lease, not buy) a car in the hopes that it will save some money on gas, especially on a car that can't make it to Calgary in the winter without stopping.

---

I also don't understand why they don't just put flexible solar cells in the roof of every Tesla so you can always trickle-charge the battery pack even if you're stranded in the desert with no one around for miles.

[Lazybones]

FYI I simply enjoy going back and forth on topics like this as it is a good way to rase issues and debunk assumptions in both directions while learning a lot. Not trying to SWAY anyone.

IC engine vs electric motor repairs, similar on both IC and electric cars so again attribute to both.

Head and pistons are part of the IC engine, that's like saying you might need to replace the bushings or windings on the electric motor, so again similar cost if something breaks on either car.

I would have to go pull the source however the power system / motor is basically solid state and the physical motor is one part.. Telsa just swaps the motor if it is defective.. It is trivial in the car.. it is otherwise nearly maintenance free.

Transmission - yes, IC engines use transmissions whereas Teslas don't appear to (not sure about other pure-electrics).  I still don't understand why you wouldn't use a transmission to gear down the electric motor so it doesn't have to spin as fast and use as much electricity to provide the same forward motion.  Or maybe Teslas do have transmissions that I just don't know about yet.  Or maybe I'm not understanding electricity usage vs heat production in the electric motors that they use (there was talk of a liquid-cooled electric motor at some point, I don't think they went with that?).

The original roadsters where designed with one, however the torque from the motor kept destroying them, they ultimately found it easier to dump more power into the motor. The current motors literally sit between the wheels .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mgillet/6875778848

Battery pack - this is an electric-only repair that has no real counterpart in the IC engine (fuel tank, fuel pump, maybe?) that has a clear shelf-life and that all the real EV discussions over the years have brought up.  Batteries degrade, and the battery packs are still expensive as all get-up (although much cheaper than the battery technology that was used in GM's EV1 program).

The battery pack is supposed to be good for 8yrs before substantial degradation.. One of the reasons Tesla is so integrated into battery production is to drive the costs down.. They are WAY ahead of anyone else at the moment.

We could keep bringing up little things here and there, and I could keep countering them, but I don't think my basic point (Teslas are not yet a good way to spend your money compared to similar, non-cachet-brand, cars) has been refuted.  If you think I'm wrong, show the math and maybe you'll change my mind.  But at present, it's hard to justify $5,000 at signing and $3,900 at delivery and $1,400 a month to lease (lease, not buy) a car in the hopes that it will save some money on gas, especially on a car that can't make it to Calgary in the winter without stopping.

Ya it isn't a reason to purchase an S or an X, but maybe the 3. The "max distance I need to dive in one shot" is similar as well, in my case visiting my dad about 4hrs away. This would require the high capacity version of the car, driving up prices.

Also you have super low gas prices.. I have the highest gas prices in the country with cheap hydro electric.. the math is a little different but still hard to push.

The autonomous features such as self parking would be amazingly convenient as well since parking sucks balls here. At least in early testing this means you could stop at the doors of the mall and tell your car to find a spot, then later summon it back the the entrance.. At least that is the goal.

I also don't understand why they don't just put flexible solar cells in the roof of every Tesla so you can always trickle-charge the battery pack even if you're stranded in the desert with no one around for miles.

I think you underestimate the output of solar. Someone did the math. Basically a Car covered in solar panels parked in the sun at the equator would only regain 7km / DAY.

[Thorin]

FYI I simply enjoy going back and forth on topics like this as it is a good way to rase issues and debunk assumptions in both directions while learning a lot. Not trying to SWAY anyone.

Thank you for clarifying, I was getting the impression people were telling me I'm wrong without providing any actual evidence, just chipping away at little things I said.

I read up on electric motors and how Tesla uses them, and I understand better now.  Basically, the motors are about the same efficiency at all speeds, as opposed to IC engines that have different efficiencies at different speeds.  An electric motor gets pulsed with electricity to power an electromagnet that pushes another magnet and starts the motor turning.  The electromagnet only needs to get pulsed for as long as the other magnet is near it.  At faster rotation speeds there are more pulses but each pulse is shorter, meaning that at any rotational speed there is essentially the same amount of electricity being used but just split into shorter and shorter pulses.  Which is entirely different than how IC engines work.  So now that I know that, it makes sense to not bother with gearing.

I think you underestimate the output of solar. Someone did the math. Basically a Car covered in solar panels parked in the sun at the equator would only regain 7km / DAY.

Nice, thanks for that link.  I guess I am indeed overestimating solar output.  Man, electric cars use sooooo much electricity.

---

I can see that your calculations for the Model 3 vs a regular car might be different than mine; you might count $1.50 per liter and $0.10 per kWh.  And the calculation is actually a lot more complex than what I put together.  There's the interest on the loan to pay the purchase price, there's the opportunity cost of not being able to invest that initial outlay on the higher price, there's gas, oil, coolant and other flushes, brakes that will probably see more wear, possible engine repairs, battery pack replacements, the resale value of the car when you try to sell it, and all of that depends on how long you plan to keep the car.

---

As for comparing costs and all that, one of the key distinctions between how I look at it and how car reviewers look at it is that just because Tesla says to compare it to a BMW doesn't mean I will.  I'll compare it to a car that's similar-sized and -capable but doesn't cost me extra just for cachet.  There's lots of features that people talk about on the Tesla S and X that I don't consider a necessity or that I actually consider a negative:

Everything running through that tablet?  What happens when it stops working?  Car electronics are notorious for misbehaving.  What happens if it's cold out and the screen fogs up?  What happens if it's cold out and I have heavy gloves on?

Autopilot / Self-Driving: who's to blame when the car runs into another car?  A driver who set Autopilot and zoned out will try to claim it's the car's fault.  Sure, the driver's supposed to stay paying attention, but do you know how hard it is to focus on an activity where you do nothing?  It'd be like playing Desert Bus.  In fact, it's an observed phenomenon that straight roads lead to lack of attention lead to more accidents: https://scroll.in/article/654502/why-better-roads-lead-to-more-accidents-in-india and http://www.roads.gov.nl.ca/moose.htm (near the end of the article).  So the manufacturer will blame the lack of attention by the driver, who wasn't paying attention because of the sheer boredom of watching-but-not-doing.  Now, a car where you still have to hold the wheel and watch the various inputs, and the car is just better at providing the inputs (e.g. lane departure warning, forward collision warning, pedestrian warning, etc), that makes sense to me.

Self-Parking: if there's an accident with a car but no one in the car, whose fault is that?  Is that a hit and run, because the driver isn't at the scene?

GPS: I think GPS is wonderful because it helps people find their way, and yet terrible because people are losing the ability to find their way themselves.  You get idiots who blindly follow the GPS instead of casting a critical eye on the instructions, and then they, for instance, drive into an LRT tunnel.  Like, that should've been obvious, but hey, the GPS said turn here so I did.

Keyless Entry / Keyless Start via App: this isn't in production yet, but there's been talk of not even needing a key in your pocket to start the car - just start it from the app.  The thinking here is that it stops you from losing your car key and then not being able to get home.  The problem, of course, is if anyone learns your Tesla account's password.  Then they'd be able to start your car and drive off with it.

Pre-Heat Car: I typically drive my car away within 30 seconds of starting it, I don't have long idles trying to warm it up.  As long as the windows are clear, the best way to warm up the drivetrain is a light load (aka slow acceleration but moving).  I run full-synthetic oil that doesn't need to warm up nearly as much and that coats all the parts of the engine much better, and my cars are all high-mileage yet start and run fine, even in the winter.

---

Last thing I want to say in this post: don't expect the Model 3 to be as cheap as they say it'll be.  $35k USD ($46k CAD) for the base model, but no one will buy the base model.  Expect $42k USD ($55k CAD) as a real starting point, remember that doesn't include delivery fees, documentation fees, AC fees, tire levies, and other things the salesmen will try to add in, and then put GST on top of all of it.

[Lazybones]

Yep, there is a reason I haven't put down a deposit.

Going back to the TYPE of car being compared, it is even more simple to say it is a choice between purchasing new and used. If you purchase a NEW ICE car of any kind vs a used one you will loose out in the long run. The reason for doing it is mostly your enjoyment of the car if you plan on owning it a long time.

No Tesla's have reached the 8 year mark for their battery pack yet so it is really hard to say how the resale of the older ones will be impacted.

Some links regarding my other comments.

Norway (correction this was for 2014 and because of EV incentives)
http://jalopnik.com/heres-why-the-tesla-model-s-is-the-1-selling-car-in-no-1651261025

Tesla in snow and cold:
http://mashable.com/2014/04/23/man-most-tesla-cars-cold/#J25EhKrZxEqw

Great warranty / poor reliability of some components (S/X are not designed for Mass production, Model 3 is supposed to be a complete re-think):
http://www.consumerreports.org/cars-tesla-reliability-doesnt-match-its-high-performance/

I see a lot of Tesla's out here, but then again I also see a lot of super cards in general around here.

[Thorin]

The Norway sales was only for one month and only because of huge, huge incentives.  One of the comments show the sales for the other months.  March was 1,493 Teslas sold, the other 11 months averaged 188 Teslas sold per month.

The Tesla In The Snow And Cold article talks about diesel in buses freezing up in Sweden.  While that does happen if it gets cold enough, it's possible they weren't using Arctic Diesel (like No. 1 Diesel here in North America), which I'm pretty sure they're supposed to in the winter time.  Nevertheless, diesels have always been known to be difficult to operate in extreme cold.  Meanwhile Tesla's website clearly shows the top-of-the-line Model S P100D having a range of 572km at 100km/h at 20C with AC off, which drops to 461km at 100kmh at -10C with heat on.  That's a 19% drop in range.  So clearly the batteries don't last as long in the cold as they do in the warmth (and you're gonna have the heat on at -10C).

I hadn't heard about poor reliability at all.  That would suck, to spend a hundred large on a car and then have parts of it fail within a year or two.

"The main problem areas involved the drivetrain, power equipment, charging equipment, giant iPad-like center console, and body and sunroof squeaks, rattles, and leaks."

Basically anything electric or electronic, as well as just not being bolted together quite right.  Sounds just like the V12 Jaguars from the 80s and 90s (these averaged 3 trips to the garage every 2 months, they were absolute junk as far as reliability was concerned, and yet people spent scads of money on Vanden Plasses).

And I'll concede the point that a used car almost always costs you less than a new car.  What you're trading is higher cost (new car) versus higher likelihood of breakdown / repairs needed (used car).  I wouldn't say it's about the enjoyment of owning the car, you can own a used car for a long time, too.  I'd say it's really about wanting to drive it for several years before your first big repair.  Toyotas average one major repair every five years, Land Rovers average one major repair every three years that's pretty much the range.  But normally, when you're buying a used car, they're selling it because it needs a major repair and they just don't want to repair the car anymore.  So I always tell my kids, if you're buying a used car then make sure you have an extra grand in the bank for the inevitable repairs required.

[Lazybones]

Meanwhile Tesla's website clearly shows the top-of-the-line Model S P100D having a range of 572km at 100km/h at 20C with AC off, which drops to 461km at 100kmh at -10C with heat on.  That's a 19% drop in range.  So clearly the batteries don't last as long in the cold as they do in the warmth (and you're gonna have the heat on at -10C).

Yep but that is still probably 4hrs of highway driving, if you plan a 20min - 30 min rest stop at a super charger you should be good on longer trips..

[Thorin]

My point was that cold does have a significant impact on the car - especially the range it can drive.  Counter to Tesla claiming cold doesn't affect the car (and using a Tesla fanboi as their testimony).  And that's the range on the nearly-$200k one.  The cheapest model, as I showed earlier, gets 247km, which is two hours of driving.  Imagine having to stop every two hours.

I recently drove to Abbotsford, the drive was split into two 3-hour blocks and a 5-hour block (neither of us needed to pee and I was having no problems staying focused on the road, what with finally getting to drive the Coquihalla for the first time in my life).  We had two ten minute stops for fuel and goodies and bathroom, and otherwise had packed lunch and supper and snacks for the drive there (and did the same for the drive back).  ~1,100km, it would've needed four full charges in the Model S P60D, and there would not have been Tesla Superchargers along the way.

For around town or drives less than two hours one way, I could see a Tesla working for us.  It's too expensive at this time, though.

I wonder about one thing - does the car know when it's still plugged in and just refuse to move?  Otherwise I know some people will forget to unplug it and drive off and cause hundreds or thousands of dollars in damage to their car and their charging station.  It's something I can imagine the Tesla engineers thinking of and writing some software to guard against, though.  They do seem pretty detailed about all the little things they add.

[Lazybones]

The car will not go forward or backward while connected to a charging source

[Lazybones]

Musk indicates they will enter the insurance business if the existing companies won't.

"If we find that the insurance providers are not matching the insurance proportionate to the risk of the car then if we need to we will in-source it," Tesla CEO Elon Musk said on the earnings call.
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/5vurtr/insurers_like_cincinnati_financial_mercury/

Still need the laws to allow it however and doesn't work in areas with government insurance.

[Darren Dirt]

"The Oatmeal" is a Tesla fanboy.

Now also a Tesla Model S* fanboy.

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla_model_s <<< yup he bought one of these Magical Space Cars.

*aka "Ultra Stealth NinjaCar", among other names.

This guy's Tesla was such a ninja, it chopped off his head before he could react: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/07/28/tesla_autopilot_death_driver_was_speeding/
(okay, it doesn't actually say he was beheaded in the article...)

So a quick comparison.  I bought a 2013 Chevrolet Silverado LT with the 5.3L engine and the Z71 base package (no chrome tubular steps, but has the offroad extras).  It cost $40,000 all-in.  I get pretty bad gas mileage, what with a lot of city driving and a lot of towing.  I think I've averaged 20L/100km over the last 65,000km (3 years 8 months so far), or 13,000L.  With a gas price of $1/L, that's $13,000 in gas so far.  Add in eight oil changes at $100 a piece and two rear diff flushes at $100 each (I'm guessing, I can't remember), that's $40,000 + $13,000 + $800 + $200 = $54,000.

That's bad gas mileage, and I've probably estimated high.  I actually get 11-13L/100km on the highway and sometimes as low as 10.0L/100km.  In the city it's anywhere between 13-19L/100km.  On the highway when towing (probably 20% of my kilometers now), I've gotten as low as 20 and as high as 30L/100km; it all depends on what direction the wind is blowing and whether I'm generally going into higher elevations or not.  But 20L/100km is a nice round number.

The car the Oatmeal guy is talking about is the Tesla Model S P85D.  That car is $85,900 + $4,295 GST = $90,195.

I need to spend another $36,195 on gas and oil to break even.  Every 8,000km I use 1,600L in gas and pay for a $100 oil change and put $25 towards a diff flush.  So that's $1,725 per 8,000km.  $36,000 / $1,720 x 8,000km = 166,956km.  So at 65,000km + 166,956km = 231,956km, I'd break even.  Lets call it 230,000km.  That's assuming I never pay for electricity.

Electricity costs about $0.05/kWh now.  The Tesla Model S P85D is rated to run 265 miles (425km) on an 85kWh charge, so that's 425km for $4.25.  230,000km / 425km x $4.25 = $2,300.  So at 230,000km, I'd still be in the black by a couple grand.

If I drive a typical 25,000km per year, and the batteries are warrantied for 8 years, then I can expect that the batteries will need to be swapped out at 200,000km, in other words before I've broken even.  And the battery packs are expected to cost $6,000 to $10,000 to replace.

Teslas and other partial- or fully-electric cars typically take a long, long time to pay off their investment.  Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of full-electric cars and I think Chevrolet has it exactly right with the Volt to add a gas-powered range extender to the car.  But they're a far cry from affordable replacement at this point.  As I showed above, the Model S P85D never actually breaks even against a V8-powered pickup truck, and it doesn't fit as many people as my truck, and it can't haul lumber or tow a giant trailer or drive through snowbanks.

Still, if I had a bucket of money just sitting around to spend on a car that expensive (meaning all my future bills and savings have been completely covered), I'd consider the Tesla Model S.  I'd get the P100D, though.  If you're gonna go big, might as well get the best.  Then again, I might just get a Nissan GT-R or the new Acura NSX or an Audi R8.

Since I don't have a bucket of money, I'll just stick with my truck and two used cars (the Mazda uses about 12L/100km, the Honda uses about 8L/100km, so driving them instead of the truck saves a boatload on gas).

Oh, and one complaint about that "almost no buttons, just a touchscreen".  Electronics are the weakest component on most cars.  Imagine not being able to close the sunroof because the touchscreen failed.

...I was told there would be no math...



But seriously yes good info IF savings is the motivatir.

But if that was his reason I doubt he woulda got the Model S! That seems the higher end Tesla, for vroom-vroom and ego reasons is my guess why he/anyone purchases. Not sure how comparable to Ferrari etc but definitely not competing with Volt or Smartcar or my Honda Fit!

His glee in his 2 page review was hard to ignore, and I think he enjoys the power and control, no mention of autopilot so that's maybe a future discussion/debate

[Thorin]

When comparing to Ferrari / Lamborghini / BMW / Mercedes / Audi / Acura / etc, the question becomes, "What are you comparing them on?"

Teslas don't work as race cars or track cars.  They take too long to re-fuel, they overheat and drop into power-limiting mode pretty quickly, they weigh too much for truly nimble track driving.

Teslas are wicked fast at initial acceleration so do really well in a drag race.  They are very difficult to modify, though, as you can't just bolt on better headers or a better exhaust or swap out a camshaft to get extra power.  You want more power, you have to swap out the motor, which will then require swapping out battery pack parts as more electricity has to flow through; that's not easy and you need to be an electrical engineer to figure it out.

Teslas fit a lot of people and stuff (compared to other luxury cars) and go a long distance (compared to other EVs) on a single charge.

Teslas actually have a higher than average number of problems according to Consumer Reports.  Top of the list is the touchscreens that control everything (and in the Model 3 are supposed to give you basic info and controls like your roadspeed and AC settings), followed by electrical problems.  Electronic and electrical problems are hard (aka expensive) to diagnose.

Teslas currently have a cachet about them that makes Tesla drivers think they're a cool car to drive.  A lot of that cachet is about not using fossil fuels (at least, not within the car - the electricity still gets generated at a plant, and there's still way more electric plants burning fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas than there are not).

I look forward to when they're no longer a cachet brand and instead have cars on offer that can compete with mainstream models at reasonable prices.  I assume by then we'll also have a crap-ton of Superchargers everywhere, because of course the problem of everyone having an electric car will be the need to constantly charge them, and since charging a battery pack takes way longer than filling a gas tank, there's gonna be line-ups for the charging stations.

[Lazybones]

A lot of that cachet is about not using fossil fuels (at least, not within the car - the electricity still gets generated at a plant, and there's still way more electric plants burning fossil fuels such as coal or natural gas than there are not).

EV cars don't need to change if the source of the grid does which is a huge advantage over trying to make cars more efficient (and waiting for them to age out and be replaced). Also even with the dirtiest grid sources the power plants tend to be much more efficient than ICE after considering the refining and transportation losses and actual burning efficiency. If your grid switches to renewable all your cars do as well if they are electric.

One of the most amazing things about Fossil fuels is the energy density.. We lose so much of it during the process to get it, yet it still holds so much.

I assume by then we'll also have a crap-ton of Superchargers everywhere, because of course the problem of everyone having an electric car will be the need to constantly charge them, and since charging a battery pack takes way longer than filling a gas tank, there's gonna be line-ups for the charging stations.

The general theory is that you charge at home or work and never need to use them for normal driving, super chargers are just for long distance travel. However as Tesla has already found out, there is a problem with apartment and condo owners with only street parking.. They don't have a regular place to charge.

[Thorin]

Energy Density - from when I last read about this a year or so ago, it was about 100lbs of lithium-ion battery contains as much energy as 1lb of gasoline.  But the batteries power electric motors that are about 80% efficient, meaning 80% of the energy turns into forward motion, while the gasoline power IC engines that are about 20% efficient.  So the math shows 100/0.8=125lbs of battery contains as much energy as 1/0.2=5lbs of gasoline.  That's a 25:1 ratio.

So battery-powered cars will be heavier than gasoline-powered cars, and it will take quite a while before the ratio gets down to, say, 10:1.  But the drivetrain and fuel storage only makes up 20% or less of a car, so how much heavier the EVs will be is up for debate.  It's likely that even at a 20:1 ratio, the weight of the cars will not be a limiting factor.

The big problem with EV still is the inconvenience.  Takes a long time to fill back up, doesn't take you as far, and it's not necessarily easy to even find a place to fill up.  Rather than work on getting the weight down, the researchers and engineers should focus on energy density only so far as to make the batteries charge faster.  And then the world needs to focus on providing much more infrastructure for charging.

[Darren Dirt]

Autopilot / Self-Driving: who's to blame when the car runs into another car?  A driver who set Autopilot and zoned out will try to claim it's the car's fault.  Sure, the driver's supposed to stay paying attention, but do you know how hard it is to focus on an activity where you do nothing?  It'd be like playing Desert Bus.  In fact, it's an observed phenomenon that straight roads lead to lack of attention lead to more accidents: https://scroll.in/article/654502/why-better-roads-lead-to-more-accidents-in-india and http://www.roads.gov.nl.ca/moose.htm (near the end of the article).  So the manufacturer will blame the lack of attention by the driver, who wasn't paying attention because of the sheer boredom of watching-but-not-doing.  Now, a car where you still have to hold the wheel and watch the various inputs, and the car is just better at providing the inputs (e.g. lane departure warning, forward collision warning, pedestrian warning, etc), that makes sense to me.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-02/tesla-autopilot-crash-caught-dashcam

...this coulda been another manufacturer just as easily; nobody right now is expecting "full" automation even though some drivers seem to expect it. :-\

Also, this comment sure sums it up:
"Facilitating distracted driving and then expecting the distracted individual to take over for an autonomous system at a moment's notice - brilliant!"

[Lazybones]

Autopilot / Self-Driving: who's to blame when the car runs into another car?  A driver who set Autopilot and zoned out will try to claim it's the car's fault.  Sure, the driver's supposed to stay paying attention, but do you know how hard it is to focus on an activity where you do nothing?  It'd be like playing Desert Bus.  In fact, it's an observed phenomenon that straight roads lead to lack of attention lead to more accidents: https://scroll.in/article/654502/why-better-roads-lead-to-more-accidents-in-india and http://www.roads.gov.nl.ca/moose.htm (near the end of the article).  So the manufacturer will blame the lack of attention by the driver, who wasn't paying attention because of the sheer boredom of watching-but-not-doing.  Now, a car where you still have to hold the wheel and watch the various inputs, and the car is just better at providing the inputs (e.g. lane departure warning, forward collision warning, pedestrian warning, etc), that makes sense to me.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-02/tesla-autopilot-crash-caught-dashcam

...this coulda been another manufacturer just as easily; nobody right now is expecting "full" automation even though some drivers seem to expect it. :-\

Also, this comment sure sums it up:
"Facilitating distracted driving and then expecting the distracted individual to take over for an autonomous system at a moment's notice - brilliant!"

https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/5welnn/my_car_hit_a_barrier_while_i_was_on_autopilot/

This is an AP1 car by the way which in theory is clearly sold as only a driver assistance feature.

I have to agree it is a catch 22 to have a feature that releases some of the control for driving but still requires you to pay attention and take over.

AP is kind of like being a  driver with a learner behind the wheel.