Jump to content

German Parts in the Tesla Model S
 

German Parts in the Tesla Model S

Guest
Sign in to follow this  
  • 4,689 views

Sign in to follow this  
From the album:

Tesla

  • 5 images
  • 0 comments
  • 1 image comment


Recommended Comments

There are no comments to display.

Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • Guest
      By Guest
      The Tesla Model S has been restored as the top-rated ultra-luxury sedan by Consumer Reports after the Silicon Valley-based electric car maker released a software update that increased its automatic emergency braking (AEB) upper limit to 90 mph.
      The Model S and Model X SUV were both downgraded in April because vehicles produced after October 2016 did not include AEB at highway speeds as part of the “standard” package. Consumer Reports said that it “awards extra points to the overall score to vehicles that provide automatic braking as a standard feature across all trims,” due to the feature’s tested ability to prevent accidents.

      The difference between models built before and after October comes from a split between Tesla’s original Autopilot system that leveraged technology from then partner Mobileye and a fully redesigned Autopilot 2.0 system – Tesla recreated “Mobileye” in 6 months. With the parting, Tesla had to develop its own AEB software, but promised owners an update by the end of 2016. After months of delays, Consumer Reports downgraded the Model S from the top spot in the ultra-luxury sedan group. On April 26, 2017, Tesla provided its first over-the-air update to its Enhanced Autopilot system in the models, but that only allowed for activation of AEB at speeds up to 28 mph.
      In early July, Tesla’s Model S received another over-the-air update that increased that limit to 90 mph. Consumer Reports said that after testing and verifying this update, the Model S was upgraded once more. The Model X, receiving the same update, “regained some points, but those did not lift it very much in its category, where it resides near the bottom.”
      Source 
    • Guest
      By Guest
      https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/forum/19-tesla-motors/
       
    • Guest
      By Guest
      https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/forum/19-tesla-motors/
    • Guest
      By Guest
      https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/forum/19-tesla-motors/
    • Guest
      By Guest
      https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/forum/19-tesla-motors/
       
    • By John Lindsay Barltrop
      @The Librarian Thanks for that "doco" on the Tesla, very interesting from both an engineering and an environmental point of view..........amazing what imperfect man can do..........one can only imagine the strides man will make under our Great Creators's guidance when mankind is perfect in a paradise earth...........thanks again.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Last weekend, Will.i.am's customized and heavily modified Tesla Model S was spotted street-parked in Beverly Hills. Luckily (or unluckily, depending on your aesthetic sensibilities) for us, someone captured a walk-around video of the thing.
      From the detailed video shot in the dark, we can see that the rear doors have been made into rear-hinged suicide doors. However, they still retain the stock handles that extend as the driver gets near.
      http://mashable.com/2016/08/30/will-i-am-tesla-model-s/#dMH6UNAmy5qb
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    61,562
    Total Topics
    113,476
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,486
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Notawelder
    Newest Member
    Notawelder
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • John Houston said: Sure it was. Read any decent books on geology and paleontology. The earth formed about 4.7 billion years ago, the earliest traces of life are at least 3.5 billion years old, macroscopic life with hard parts first appeared about 550 million years ago. Within a short time predators appeared. Do you not accept this? Ah, you're a young-earth creationist. No wonder you say such things. So if scripture said the moon is made of cheddar cheese, would you believe it? So you think the Bible trumps science and the fossil record. Most predators are both scavengers and active hunters. Problem solved. Predators that also scavenged. The fossil record records plenty of examples of predator/prey interaction. For example, many trilobites, up to 520 million years old, exhibit bites taken out of their shells. A few of these exhibit partially healed bite marks, showing that they survived an attack and lived on. That is not possible in a young-earth creationist view. So again, which do you accept? The fossil record and science, or the fallible biblical interpretations of a few religious leaders?
    • I would like to say this... when I read about the creation, life was not created as "red in tooth and claw" as you put it. Life was not eating each other to exist. At death maybe, but no life form was hunting another for food in the beginning. Things have to make sense if one believes in scripture. Can't believe in one concept and not another. If it is written that life was to eat, and that was ALL LIFE, green vegetation, then common sense would tell me, the only meateating was going on at death, scavengering a carcass. No, wild ferocious dinosaurs as science think they know from bones. But ask yourself, what cleaned away these massive bodies after they died? We have sharks in the seas, what is left over it settles on the bottom for scavenging. And we see that today. Animals not created to live forever had to be removed, cleaned up after, who,did that Adam? Come on think about it.
    • And yet the Prism and South of Baghdad says otherwise.
    • Yes. But with no change to the meaning or interpretation of the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" as we can see by every example of those officials who were impeached during the years when that phrase still held the British meaning. And we can also compare every example of those officials who were impeached in Britain during the centuries and decades leading up to the US Constitution, and beyond. I should also add that I think Trump is guilty of many abuses of power. If he was right about the way that he says Obama was guilty of abuses of power (and I think he was) then Trump must be guilty by his own admission. I also think that Trump definitely had in mind a quid pro quo with Ukraine. This doesn't mean that he got his way, however. The people around him often tend to reel him in, or just end up doing the more politically legal thing, even if Trump is ready and proud to do something illegal or unethical. Even if Trump only did the right thing after he was "caught" as Democrats would like to say, it doesn't make the desire to do the wrong thing, or even the request "impeachable" on its own. Trying to do the wrong thing, is not the same as doing it. One can point out the fact that aid was held up, and even that it was held up so that he would get something he wanted of personal benefit. But if the other side did not give him what he wanted, then we don't have the crux of the quid pro quo anyway. Personally, I don't even think it's the right thing to give aid to Ukraine. The whole point is to paint Russia as an evil adversary or enemy when we are not at war, or shouldn't be. We keep a proxy war going through Ukraine only because we (and especially Democrats) love the idea of a powerful bullying empirical power that shows it wants to stand up to Putin, even if this teases out a WWIII. The Democrats want to look even stronger against Putin, because they are still stuck on this missed chance to make it look like Trump is weak on Putin, or somehow in cahoots with Putin. Trump actually tends, most of the time, toward a foreign policy that is less hawkish than Democrats. Of course, that probably doesn't sit well with several of the military agencies and contractors who "need" more war. Many of Trump's "walkbacks" have been over times when he wanted to scale back military operations and expenditures, but came back the next day to show that it wasn't a real scaling back. Some say they can see a pattern which was especially predictable with Bolton, Pompeo, etc. As his advisors and cabinets change personnel, his own statements will still always be unpredictable, but his "walkbacks" are less so.  After listening carefully to a few minutes of the testimony today, I'm thinking that Biden's son was picked by Burisma for the same reason that a corrupt company like Theranos put Reagan-era George Schultz on its board. It is a way to pay for some credibility or even protect from too much inquiry or investigation. And after watching him become the most hated mayor in America, Giuliani is just about the kind of person I would expect to be looking for these same kinds of deals for his friends and relatives. Also I got the impression that the phone transcript of Trump's "perfect" call is not the full transcript. There was too much legal activity going on immediately after the call to make sure that transcript would become legal. There were some hints in the way legal-savvy people word their answers that raised some flags for me.  
    • And, as I remember, the Colonists thought the British Interpretation of how things should be handled that was an onerous burden to them ... sufficient enough to go to war against the mightiest  army and navy of that time period.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.