this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
23 points (71.7% liked)

Today I Learned

18536 readers
270 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)

Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**

Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.

Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.

Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.

Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.

Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.

Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.

Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.

Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.

Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
23
TIL How Elon Musk Picked Tesla's Strange Charge Port Placement (www.pcmag.com)
submitted 14 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Strange charge port placement... aka exactly where the gas tank is on half of normal ICE vehicles. They then try to justify it being strange because Americans don't back into parking spots most of the time, which is of debatable importance to start with. Then try to say it's just because it fit Elon's garage better... But never point out that it's also where 50% of people are used to their gas cap being already.

People constantly complain online that EVs do things different just because. Tesla doesn't make a change and leaves things familiar and people also complain. The only possible objectively better placement is which side would be street side parking. But even then that would change depending on which side of the road you drive on still, so people would still complain.

For Tesla, until 2024, charging infrastructure was something Tesla built out on their own with the Supercharger network, not something they relied on third parties for. So it didn't matter where it was placed since they controlled 99.9% of the charging anyway. They built the chargers with the port location already in mind, and that infrastructure didn't need to consider anyone else because no one else was using Tesla's connector despite it being openly available. Now that it's a standard everyone else is adopting they're having to update the existing locations to better support other car designs, that has nothing to do with where the port is on Tesla vehicles.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The Tesla connector was NOT openly available until late 2022, and wasn't a fully published standard until 2024. They originally wanted a hefty licensing concession from other vendors. Specifically, they would only license it if they joined a patent pool.

In fact, the current NACS connector isn't even electrically the same as the one Tesla used in 2021. Superchargers are backwards compatible, but they have to support multiple standards. It also means that older Teslas can't use the growing network of NACS chargers without an upgrade.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Other companies being unwilling to accept the licensing terms doesn't mean the option was unavailable.

Either way though, none of that has anything to do with port placement, which is what the article is trying to claim is strange for whatever reason.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

You could put a price tag of eleventy billion dollars on something and say it isn't unavailable. When you're effectively handing over your business for it, it practically is.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

charge ports should always be on the right, because it allows street side charging. VW is the only one who's got this right.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

And what about countries that drive on the left?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

get with the times. /s

More seriously, most parts of the car already need to be changed for the RHD market. punching a hole in the front left fender instead of the front right is not a big problem, and the cable is easy enough to reroute.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 minutes ago* (last edited 11 minutes ago)

get with the times. /s

The collapsed British times or the currently collapsing US times?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago

This is really the only valid argument for moving it. But even then, it would depend on what side of the street you drive on, albeit that would be a smaller issue since you'd only have the British and a few other former colonies that still drive on the wrong side to worry about.

The simpler answer is just that street side parking and charging wasn't really a factor when this was being determined. Hell, third party charging at all wasn't really a thing.

The expectation was you'd have a garage at home and you'd install a charger, or the Superchargers which were designed for the charger location. One of the primary advantages of an EV is always having a full charge when you need it, not having to stop to charge unless you're on a trip. Tesla built their charging infrastructure themselves, so they had complete control over that, and none of them use on street parking. The expectation was people buying $80k+ vehicles will probably have a garage and can install a home charger. The cheaper models came way after that.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

What's wrong with reverse parking?

  • Backwards parking is actually easier because your front wheels turn.
  • It's better for your future self. Backing out of a parking spot with reduced visibility is harder and can be dangerous.
  • Overall safety. I used to work in a company where reverse parking was mandatory because in case of an emergency the parking lot could be evacuated faster.
  • Better visibility when leaving the parking spot is safer for other traffic participants
[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago

I'm interested in knowing more about where you worked that had that detailed of an evacuation plan. I know that emergency services (police, etc) do that in case a call comes in, but that's not exactly an evacuation.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

I have to mention I have a reverse camera with guidance lines. I can back into a parking spot nearly as fast and swift as I do forward parking.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Very valid points and I park reversed most of the time as well. However slanted parking is quite common in store fronts.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago

I saw slanted parking for the first time in an underground garage. It was so much easier to park and get out. I guess they probably lose one parking spot on each row with it, but technically the rows can be narrower.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If you don't have to do it for a valid reason (safety), I'd say you are pretty much just inconveniencing everyone around you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

How? If you're not backing into your spot when parking, you'll be backing out when leaving the spot.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Because it takes longer to back in than to back out? Read the article that someone else linked

[–] [email protected] 42 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

tldr

musk rented some place. the location on the car was most convenient to him.

tltldr

muski is a narcissist asshole

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 hours ago

Without even reading, I thought, "on a whim?" The answer, unsurprisingly, is yes.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I'm actually disappointed its not frat-boy humor. Just more of, even when he's actually pragmatic, its in a way that everyone else has to live with.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

We've always got his model names for the juvenile humor.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Nah. It was juvenile of them to insist the E had to be a 3, as if children would be the ones buying the cars.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago

Wow, such a bold claim when you don't know what you're talking about about.

Ford already had the rights to a vehicle named "Model E". So the closest way to achieve the similar design language they wanted was a stylized 3... Which also worked since it was their third model (excluding the roadster which was no longer made).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 9 hours ago

That's because Ford would have sued the dogshit out them.