Rendered at 19:54:54 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
mvkel 1 days ago [-]
I maintain that the entire event was to create a trail of evidence that justifies merging Tesla and SpaceX. No car will ever ship.
You can hear it in the voices of the creators, when they're giving an overview of the car to MotorWeek and other car media outlets. 99% focused on the rocket and battery tech/innovation, almost zero about the actual driving characteristics of the car, or that it -is- a car. Seems more like a rolling marketing mule.
vannevar 1 days ago [-]
The specs of the base (non-rocket-powered) car are pretty mediocre: RWD-only with 320 mile range. That's not terribly impressive in 2026, by 2028 it will be obsolete on delivery. The styling can charitably be described as generic. I agree, I don't think they have any intention of making this car.
andor 6 hours ago [-]
If they are really going to install fans to generate downforce, they will need space that the battery could otherwise occupy. The lower weight of a smaller battery is also beneficial for acceleration.
Based on the specs, I wouldn't compare the (non-existing) roadster to regular electric cars, but rather to something like the McMurtry Spéirling, which also has active downforce. It's not about range, but acceleration and cornering speed.
HarHarVeryFunny 1 days ago [-]
To be fair the claimed ~1.6sec 0-60 acceleration speed is impressive - this is the benefit of electric - although if you have enough money you can already do that today in the way sexier looking Rimac Nevera R.
vannevar 1 days ago [-]
The new motor does seem like good tech. But not enough to overcome the other shortcomings, IMHO.
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
Which in practice you will never ever do...
HarHarVeryFunny 1 days ago [-]
I guess you could rent a trace track to give it a try, but yeah ... Supercars are more for posing than being very practical. Bughatti Veyron tire life at top speed is 15 MINUTES.
FireBeyond 21 hours ago [-]
And for anything else, it doesn't matter. My RS 5 might take 7:55 around the Nordschleife, versus a Model S Plaid at 7:35... but when the Tesla pulls in after its lap for "thermal throttling", the Audi will just ... keep going. I think the last time I got bored and curious, at 130mph and a full tank of gas, the Audi will just keep going for about 200 miles before needing the gas station. The Model S will get ... 75-80.
I love adrenaline, and a 2s (or less) 0-60 time is exhilarating. But a 3s isn't much less fun, and on a commute, is not practically any different.
itbeho 1 days ago [-]
You're probably not a car enthusiast. Most people with performance cars love going 0-60mph, at least here in the USA.
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
> You're probably not a car enthusiast.
That's your conclusion.
> Most people with performance cars love going 0-60mph, at least here in the USA.
I drive in traffic and I care a lot more about handling than I do about 0-60 which you rarely if ever will do without a car in front of you.
HarHarVeryFunny 2 hours ago [-]
This guy at least concerned about other people's safety (no car in front), if not his own.
I'd rather my performance car takes significant winding ocean roads like its on rails, than my BIL's performance car which by his own words (and both our experience) is "significantly sloppier and a lot more hair raising".
And then I get the joys, living near a base, of 19 year old E-2s with base Challengers thinking they have a "performance car" and constantly wanting to race me.
jacquesm 20 hours ago [-]
Exactly. Straight lines are easy and boring.
skybrian 1 days ago [-]
How much electric sports car owners care about increasing range beyond 300 miles or so? It seems hard to believe that such a car would be obsolete.
vannevar 1 days ago [-]
You're right, this is a very fair point. But if you had a choice between two sports cars with similar performance specs and one had 400+ mile range, you'd probably be inclined to take that one, all else being equal. This is a highly optimized version of older battery technology, which will be even older by the time it goes to production; you'd think that a car with a rocket option would also include a cutting edge battery.
l1tany11 21 hours ago [-]
And what other electric sports car can you buy? Oh wait, I almost forgot, they don’t exist. Unless you count the >$2M Rimac which is stated to go out of production at the end of this year. If this roadster becomes available, it could easily be the only electric sports car on the market.
Sedan, sedan, not in us market, not in us market, not in us market… this roadster is going to be made in the US for the US market, which in terms of supercars/hypercars is a huge part of the global market.
tpm 10 hours ago [-]
Xiaomi SU7 Ultra, Yangwang U9 Xtreme (that one does 308 mph), Ferrari Luce (sold out?) and many others.
vannevar 18 hours ago [-]
>Oh wait, I almost forgot, they don’t exist.
At this point, the Roadster doesn't exist either, at least as a production car. The sibling comment lists several potential competitors. My guess is that if the Roadster somehow draws a bunch of new pre-orders, there will be more by 2028.
l1tany11 1 hours ago [-]
Listing a bunch of sedans? Ok… do you know what a sports car is? Obviously not.
20 hours ago [-]
serf 1 days ago [-]
this is one point I agree on.
It's about right there with other sports cars rated ranges; 911/M4 get around 300-350 and the Corvette hits 400ish.
a road rally from LA to LV is 270ish miles. What else do you need a hyper-car-thing for?
Now we just need to get some goofy Musk tunnels involved so there's a reason to have the fan suction.
(aside from breaking the windows of traffic behind you with road debris)
enslavedrobot 10 hours ago [-]
The fans enable cornering at basically double the lateral g force of any other production car.
They also enable the insane launch traction needed for the non thrust 0-60.
It's the key to the cars performance.
angoragoats 1 days ago [-]
The original 2nd-gen Roadster reveal claimed a 200kwh battery pack and 600+ miles of range. There were analysts arguing at the time that the state of the art in battery tech could not possibly allow for that much capacity in that size car. This smacks of the same BS that happened with the Cybertruck — the originally announced range/pricing was far, far better than what actually shipped.
There should be legal investigations into this practice, because it’s extremely deceptive.
reitzensteinm 22 hours ago [-]
In a contemporary interview with Marques Brownlee, Musk said they didn’t currently have the technology and the specs were an extrapolation for what they expected to be available on release.
This isn’t a comment on your broader point.
FireBeyond 21 hours ago [-]
Oh, just like how they "projected" that the Cybertruck would be able to tow a Porsche faster than the Porsche itself, or they released "simulated" Plaid numbers.
It got to the point where even Tesla's lawyers had to get involved, and numerous reports from Tesla disclaim that "Elon Musk's statements are aspirational and may not reflect engineering realities".
angoragoats 22 hours ago [-]
> In a contemporary interview with Marques Brownlee, Musk said they didn’t currently have the technology and the specs were an extrapolation for what they expected to be available on release.
That’s even worse then, because it was supposed to be released by 2020. Here we are in 2026 and I still don’t think it’s possible to cram 200kwh into a sports car. I take this as an admission straight from the horse’s mouth that either: 1) they were lying and had no intention of shipping the car as specified when it was announced, or 2) they’re completely inept at making predictions about the trajectory of technology core to their products. Both are extremely bad.
andrewtbham 1 days ago [-]
100 percent agree... PR stunt to assist acquisition of Tesla so Musk can gain control of Tesla
jgalt212 1 days ago [-]
I assume you mean de facto and de jure.
7e 1 days ago [-]
Similar to the solar roof debacle when bailing out SolarCity.
dgellow 1 days ago [-]
Yeah, that’s also the conclusion I arrived to. It’s a clear step to justify the merger
andai 1 days ago [-]
If you will know them by their fruits, then the merger is objectively awesome.
mvkel 19 hours ago [-]
I don't think any spacex engineer would agree. "Hey, instead of making this rocket go to mars, can you make this car do a kickflip?"
xvxvx 1 days ago [-]
Elon:’This is a car people will be able to own and drive’.
Someone add that to the list of bullshit he said.
sneak 1 days ago [-]
I’d take the other side of that bet. $10k USD says that normal consumers are owning and driving Tesla Roadsters within 10 years.
If you believe what you write, it’s easy money for you. Deal?
otterley 1 days ago [-]
Just bet on Polymarket or Kalshi so we can all take your money instead. Post a screenshot of your position so we know you’re not full of baloney.
HarHarVeryFunny 1 days ago [-]
The first (much nicer looking!) Roadster Version 2 prototype was announced ~10 years ago (2017), and was never released, and has now been replaced with this, so it's a matter of faith to say it'll ever be released. It'd never sell in sufficient numbers to move the needle for Tesla, probably not even sufficient to recoup development costs.
Note that the only version of the car that could conceivably be street legal is the base one with downforce fan only, and no cold thruster launch (boost) - NTSB is never going to approve throwing out a condensation cloud smokescreen on the highway!
vannevar 1 days ago [-]
The "other side of that bet" would be betting that ordinary consumers will be driving it in 2028, which is what Elon claimed. A lot can happen in ten years---if Tesla ends up selling a clean-sheet sports car called something else by 2036, would that still count? Or are we talking about this specific model with these specs?
angoragoats 1 days ago [-]
> if Tesla ends up selling a clean-sheet sports car called something else by 2036, would that still count? Or are we talking about this specific model with these specs?
Yes, and note that this has already happened: the original Roadster v2 from 2017 never shipped and was replaced with this one.
skeeter2020 1 days ago [-]
do you normally commit to - and pay a sizeable deposit - ten years before you take deilvery of a new car?
alistairSH 1 days ago [-]
$250k USD invested today is ~$400k to ~$600k in 2036.
And that $50k deposit made 9 years ago? That could have been nearly $300k in 2036.
"A fool and his money..."
I don't have any particular problem with a modest (a few 10s of thousands) deposit on a ~3 year timeline that's reasonably confident. But six figures on a 100% speculative consumer good (ie not even remotely an investment)? Oof, no thanks.
wlesieutre 1 days ago [-]
Can I take that bet on the one that does flips?
lubujackson 1 days ago [-]
"Tesla Roadster" in name, maybe. Tesla Roadster as a flying car that drives up walls? 0% chance of that seeing the light of day.
2OEH8eoCRo0 1 days ago [-]
Did we invent a new logical fallacy? If you believed that you'd bet money on it and since you aren't betting money on it then your argument is invalid!
jefftk 1 days ago [-]
If you mean one that can do the stunts from the demo I'm in, but not for $10k: that's more than I'm willing to bet with people I don't know. How about $100, since most of the point of a bet is formalizing a disagreement and showing that you're serious?
tstrimple 13 hours ago [-]
Elon stans are deeply weird people.
15 hours ago [-]
clipsy 1 days ago [-]
Within 10 years of today, or within 10 years of when it was announced 9 years ago?
sneak 1 days ago [-]
From when the statement in question was made, obviously.
alistairSH 1 days ago [-]
So, this new promise negates the original 3-year delivery timeline promised in 2017? That timeline, taken alongside Musk's recent "we're no longer a car company" statements is... well, you do you, I guess, but I'm not in the business having handing piles of cash to a billionaire.
xvxvx 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
ourmandave 1 days ago [-]
There's a website dedicated to Elon's predictions.
He tweeted back in 2019 there would be a flying roadster.
At this level of tortured language, he could have shot the car out of a fucking cannon and it would count as flying.
Geezus_42 1 days ago [-]
Except it doesn't fly, it falls gracefully.
JamesSwift 1 days ago [-]
Looks to be more falling with style to me
Geezus_42 1 days ago [-]
Same same. Lol
hingler36 1 days ago [-]
As much as I dislike Tesla, a lot of this feels like pretty standard legalize that would be in most reservation or pre-order documents to protect the company. Can anyone speak to if this is truly unique for in this case?
ambicapter 1 days ago [-]
If there's anything we've learned in the US in the past ten years, is that this new breed of corporations and government officials will gladly take the "standard" set of rules that everyone has been operating in in good faith and exploit the gaps as hard as humanly possible.
__m 1 days ago [-]
well, people are waiting since 9 years, i think that's unique
lberk 1 days ago [-]
Unique in what way?
The Trabant often had wait lists of ten or more years[1][2].
The Soviet Lada often had wait times of five to ten years[3].
Even the Morgan Plus 8 had wait lists of (reportedly) a decade long as recently as 1990[4].
Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, no one has taken delivery of the Roadster announced 9 years ago; all of your examples are cars having more demand than supply (and in the case of the Trabant and the Lada, fewer years); as for the Morgan Plus 8, Morgan make a deliberate choice to keep the production figures where they were, despite the high demand. The key difference seems to be between little supply (your examples) and no supply.
Usually, if you had been unable to deliver a product in that time, it's probably about time to cancel it. Of course, I may be wrong, but my understanding is that 9-year-ago-announced Roadster has not been cancelled, and people have not been refunded.
lberk 1 days ago [-]
Gotcha, essentially, unique in that the supply has remained zero, and no fulfilled orders/deliveries thus far, despite a nine year duration between initial announcement and the current date. I guess if that bothers you, cancel your order and get a refund? MKBHD has reportedly done so and gotten a full refund[0].
> Usually, if you had been unable to deliver a product in that time, it's probably about time to cancel it.
Why? Seems like demand (in this case) is sufficient enough to still launch the product. If a business has the demand for the product and sufficient capital to continue investing in an area they deem to have a viable product, isn't that their prerogative?
Fair, I'll take notion that it's their prerogative. However, my understanding is that it's not trivial to cancel one's order[0], though as both your and my source points out: it is possible, though an unnecessary hassle (particularly for a company that was partially made famous by making ordering their cars so easy).
Fair point. There’s an absolute asymmetry between ease of placing an order and difficulty to cancel it. ISTR Nassim Taleb making a similar point on twitter, alleging he made a deposit for a car, on his phone, whilst in his pocket. Definitely worth keeping in mind.
angoragoats 1 days ago [-]
This is a completely different car than the one that was announced in 2017. So they cancelled it, and replaced it with a new one, which is likely never going to ship and will serve as a way to prop up whatever merger scam the CEO has cooking in his drug-impaired brain.
FireBeyond 21 hours ago [-]
Kinda like Pepsi and UPS. Seven years of waiting for their 1,000+ Semis they had ... 37, that mostly did yard work because... no charging network.
And then this year Musk's band of merry clowns announces that they've "completely redesigned the windows" because, I shit you not, "Turns out there’s a lot of infrastructure in the world, whether it’s a badge reader, or your toll booth, or you’re talking to somebody on a call box. There’s all kinds of stuff right at that height, and it became evident that we needed a roll-down window in order to make that infrastructure easier to interface with."
Spectacular R&D on which to tie your mission critical infrastructure to. Oh, and the charger network, "still a 'hurdle'", says an anonymous Tesla employee in a feat of understatement.
RobotToaster 1 days ago [-]
First time I've seen "longer queues than the soviet union" used as a defence.
1 days ago [-]
jbm 1 days ago [-]
During the pandemic, Canadians were told that to order a new Toyota Sienna or a Rav4 Prime may require between 3 and 5 years. This is from Toyota and both cars were in full production. If you preordered they would not even guarantee the price, and reserved the right to increase it.
It was so ridiculous that people would buy the car in the US and bring it here. Other people gave up and started importing 30
year old Japanese minivans — I see JDM minivans relatively commonly now.
As such an X year wait for a car isn't new even outside the dysfunctional communist block.
However I'm pretty sure Toyota will deliver eventually, can't say the same for the Roadster.
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
Exceptional situations should not be compared to normality.
shermantanktop 1 days ago [-]
Sure, a space-age flying car which isn’t in production yet might have a waiting list. But what about eastern bloc econoboxes like the Trabant or the Lada? That are literally made of cardboard?
You’ve got to be kidding. If your point is that waiting lists for cars can exist, I concede that. I see no other parallels.
gremlinunderway 1 days ago [-]
This has to be a satirical response. Please tell me it's satire. If it's satire it's actually a pretty bad caricature of elon fan boys.
Because I can't believe anyone would seriously make a comparison to a 55+ year old car manufactured in a communist country.
It's like saying that an email server that takes a week to send emails is fine because the wait times for a posted letter in the 1960s could take 2 weeks.
turtlebits 1 days ago [-]
Getting tired of all the bystander commentary. It's a toy for rich people. If there's 0 chance you're going to buy it, who really cares about your opinion.
shermantanktop 1 days ago [-]
Is this a super-serious discussion amongst committed prospective buyers? I don’t see much evidence of that.
As for the rest, this is the Internet, and a cat may look at a king.
tekla 1 days ago [-]
But you HAVE to get karma for having the right opinion.
pessimizer 1 days ago [-]
You think nobody cares about their opinions, but somebody cares about your fatigue?
It's like a sucker's (or a fraudster's) war cry to say that the people who are already hooked into a venture are the only ones who should be allowed to point out that it might be a scam.
1 days ago [-]
TiredOfLife 10 hours ago [-]
Not a car, but Star citizen was supposed to release 12 years ago. And they are still collecting money.
piva00 1 days ago [-]
Yes, it's common legalese but you expect something like that from a shady Kickstarter campaign rather than a trillion dollar company.
WarmWash 1 days ago [-]
The media will turn anything into a story if they sense it can be framed in a way that draws clicks.
jansport123 1 days ago [-]
one one hand, i think showmanship can be used to generate interest for something that is far off and thus allow humans to pursue long term goals and i think elon has used this tactic in the past for the right reasons but these days it seems like he just uses this tactic to deceive people - almost like trump.
sportsracersss 1 days ago [-]
He's using it to hype his case for SpaceX acquiring Tesla.
Elon's M.O. is to roll his tapped-out prior ventures (including debts) into the current white-hot thing.
andsoitis 1 days ago [-]
> He's using it to hype his case for SpaceX acquiring Tesla.
> Elon's M.O. is to roll his tapped-out prior ventures (including debts) into the current white-hot thing.
SpaceX is the long game. It started before Tesla. It is not a fly by night operation.
parsimo2010 1 days ago [-]
While I understand your thinking, he rolled Twitter into SpaceX. He absolutely uses it as a financial vehicle, regardless of how legitimate the space business is.
FireBeyond 21 hours ago [-]
Alright, fine, then let's talk about his BIL's failing endeavor SolarCity, which was given an undeserved lifeline from Tesla.
andsoitis 1 days ago [-]
It is standard practice for companies to have some of their businesses subsidize other parts of the overall business. Not sure why people are so fixated on this case. It is also not unique to technology at all.
ambicapter 1 days ago [-]
X is less of an "other part of the overall business [SpaceX]" and more of a bolted-on, completely unrelated part merged together b/c of financial difficulties.
andsoitis 1 days ago [-]
Who cares?
ambicapter 1 days ago [-]
"It's standard practice"
"It's completely different than what you're talking about"
"Guys...who even cares?"
nullocator 22 hours ago [-]
Presumably the tax payers subsidizing SpaceX and now twitter, and soon Tesla, and perhaps also anyone where their retirement is being risked because Elon Musk/SpaceX are trying to game and manipulate the index funds.
archagon 18 hours ago [-]
Lots of people?
shigawire 1 days ago [-]
Because the sky high IPO valuable was mostly based on SpaceX being an AI company that has a huge TAM. Things that have nothing to do with space (please don't say space data centers).
andsoitis 1 days ago [-]
> > Not sure why people are so fixated on this case.
> Because the sky high IPO valuable was mostly based on SpaceX being an AI company that has a huge TAM
OK, but why do you care so much about that? Are you disadvantaged or harmed in some way? I'm truly trying to understand because it seems to me many of these arguments are not really oriented around deepening understanding or changing minds, but rather about the boring business of standing one's ground and repeating the same arguments (and I'm thinking both of FOR and AGAINST positions). It is just so dull.
FireBeyond 1 days ago [-]
Yes, because this position is being leveraged into things that significant public funds are being put into - SpaceX is on the receiving end of huge tax breaks, notable government contracts, extensive environmental impact waivers and so on and on. Yeah, I can be annoyed that a non-zero part of this is a shell game that is likely to leave taxpayers holding the bag when its considered "essential infrastructure" because of the all too cosy Trump-Musk relationship.
Geezus_42 1 days ago [-]
Because Twitter has nothing to do with the actual functioning of SpaceX.
andsoitis 1 days ago [-]
Geezus_42, why do you and others care so much about that?
Is it because you are a SpaceX shareholder and you feel your interests as a shareholder are undermined? If you have not vested interest in SpaceX, why would you care that it supports some shitty venture like Twitter/X?
I don't understand.
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
You seem to care more than they do with this many comments saying people shouldn't care.
andsoitis 1 days ago [-]
I'd say I care about two things in this case:
a) to understand why people are so worked up about this man and his antics. I think it is very interesting because it can also reveal something about myself.
b) interesting, novel conversation that broadens understanding
I don't care about the man or his antics or predictable conversations that are boring.
But I think you've hit on something true: I should just move on and let people churn on this stuff and don't get entangled myself. Thanks for pointing it out.
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
> to understand why people are so worked up about this man and his antics.
(1) because he is currently (I believe) the wealthiest man in the world
(2) because he uses that wealth to influence politics across the globe, from Germany and the UK to the United States
(3) that - and this is my opinion - this influence should be illegal
(4) that he has a long history of lying, overpromising, under delivering, not withstanding his other achievements
(5) that he is in bed with the current US administration which is doing a lot of damage inside the United States.
(6) that he personally took on roles in that government and did a lot of damage outside of the United States
(7) That he was very much a darling of the left leaning portion of society and used that position to enrich himself and then did a 180 and aligned himself directly and openly with various extreme right parties all over the world. Some people feel betrayed.
So Musk elicits a lot of emotions, for better or for worse.
Does that help?
netsharc 1 days ago [-]
For his latest cowardice (spot my bias), it seems a few days he agreed to Trump's demands to weaken Starlink so Ukraine's use was restricted, making them less able to defend against Russian jet-powered drones hitting civilian targets. How is that an action of a man worthy of any praise?
I assumed he ordered his Starlink-lackeys (also a group of self-serving cowards, in my opinion from the point of view on my high horse) because he wanted to remain/get back on Trump's good graces...
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
They're passing the buck between them because a bunch of people in Ukraine got killed because of this and they don't want to be stuck with the responsibility for that. The aiding-and-abetting link has never been that clear and direct. There is also still an outside chance that this was a solo action by Hegseth.
I wonder how those employees feel and why they didn't refuse the order. Let him do it himself.
1 days ago [-]
otterley 1 days ago [-]
It’s all about how you frame it. He could have framed it as a technology demo instead of as a new car that will ship. That would have been equally impressive and more honest.
ok123456 1 days ago [-]
No insurance will touch that car with a 10-foot pole.
netsharc 1 days ago [-]
Doesn't Tesla offer its own insurance...
That'd be funny. An insurance where if you want to make a claim, you just get met with a Grok-bot that'll do the airbnb-style fucking to you (ignore the complaints, minimize them, be as stupid and slow as possible, and offer 10% of the refund that the complainant will frustratedly take as "at least it's something").
thewileyone 16 hours ago [-]
Taking deposits for a product that may never be manufactured and delivered is an accounting hack to boost revenue numbers.
jgilias 1 days ago [-]
Wouldn’t be a first
ZiiS 1 days ago [-]
Conversely, I can guarantee they won't get the functionality demoed.
Hydraulix989 1 days ago [-]
Even the Cybertruck reservations took years to materialize, at a much higher price.
zombot 8 hours ago [-]
Your donations to the Tesla Survival Fund are appreciated nevertheless.
gandhiandy69 1 days ago [-]
100k people will be driving Tesla Roadsters on Mars in 3 years
micromacrofoot 1 days ago [-]
There's probably going to be a single trick car someone can demo remotely (no passengers) somewhere like an hour away from LA, it will very often be down for maintenance, and everyone will only be able to buy the street legal version of the car which won't be available for another 3 years
Kevin_Flynn 1 days ago [-]
... because it was always a PR stunt.
The dialog of the event spelled it out.
"We are here at SpaceX's uh rocket test and development center in McGregor, Texas. It's 4,000 acres. Thank you for having us. Thank you for hosting us, SpaceX."
Establishes SpaceX as a giant.
"we're 20 years from when Elon first introduced the Roadster to the world. And it was really a proof of concept that proved EVs were viable product, fun to drive, could go the distance."
Establishes Elon/Tesla as an innovator. Spells out clearly the context "proof of concept." Associates "demonstrations" with "proof." Introduces the concepts of "fun", "viable", and "longevity" aka "distance."
"They were real cars. And look at how far we've come in those 20 years."
Compares introduction of a car, with current demonstration, and establishes the idea that todays "flying car" is going to be just as successful, given time.
"But you know, the last time we had Roadster and SpaceX together, we put Elons's into orbit."
Establishes "the sky as the limit" as to what these two companies can do together. The heart of the entire sales pitch.
"And you can see there, and you know, Starman is still out there somewhere. Amazing feat."
Defines "creating more space junk for publicity stunts" as an "amazing feat."
"you're going to see the results of what happens when you have a collaboration with the world's best car company and the world's best rocket company."
Repetition of the sales pitch to cement it.
"The future is autonomous, Elon, right? Yes. But this is not an autonomous car. It is the last. Well, it it is technically autonomous for this demo to make sure we don't kill anyone. Correct. So, just in case. Uh, but uh this will actually be long-term the only uh manually driven car that Tesla makes. You're going to have some fun sometimes. Yeah. And so, if you're going to have only one manually driven car, let's uh let's take it to the limits and way past the limits."
Confusion. Establishes autonomous with inevitibility. Claims demo car is not automous, then claims it is autonomous, because its dangerous to drive it manually. Plants the idea that its the only car you're gonna need, you can drive it manually, and its the ultimate experience.
Then, as everyone is confused, they start the countdown, and the magic show commences.
Either you see the scripted psyop aka sales pitch or you don't.
We all watched the same demo.
Some of us saw an amazing future.
The rest of us saw a circus selling timeshare condos.
Tesla and SpaceX are "engineering companies." Engineering is at the heart of what they do.
Wouldn't you have more confidence, if they had engineered something useful for a demonstration as an investor, instead of the song and dance ?
Companies are supposed to produce useful products to generate profits, which is why investors invest, right ?
To me it looks like they are out of actual real useful ideas. If they had a new useful idea why didn't we see it ?
I think this might have lowered institutional investor confidence because it looks like a vegas show and smells like a tourist pump and dump intended to capture the "retail publics" money.
You can do better Elon. I know you can.
ps. I am a Starlink subscriber, and I love the service. Please don't cancel me.
cyanydeez 1 days ago [-]
Worlds richest nigerian prince wants list of most gullible people.
Kevin_Flynn 1 days ago [-]
I would pay you to write executive summaries for me.
That was perfect.
netsharc 1 days ago [-]
That's racist, he's South African!
(How many layers of sarcasm does this comment have...)
onlypassingthru 1 days ago [-]
Serious question, do better how? What if reusable rockets and S3XY cars were the breakthroughs and everything after is just meh?
Kevin_Flynn 1 days ago [-]
To be clear, my intention was not to throw shade on SpaceX or Tesla as companies, or on any of their USEFUL products. I like both companies, and their products. I'm a customer.
My intention was to demonstrate the intent behind the demonstration, as physics says this is 100+ times more inefficient than a business jet, and will never fly more than 5 miles given its current size. Thats not me, thats PHYSICS.
This was a sales pitch for a corporate merger, not a product launch.
This is financial engineering.
So by "do better" I meant, think longer term, solve a real problem. They have the resources, and the talent, and we got a donkey show.
jacquesm 1 days ago [-]
It will never fly more than 200 meters.
bcatanzaro 1 days ago [-]
Tesla isn’t interested in building cars. They canceled SX in order to build the Cybertruck. I expect they’ll let 3Y just get really old.
Instead of S3XY cars we get stunts. Solar roofs, Concept car roadsters, and of course humanoid robots.
If only Tesla would be interested in cars again.
pfdietz 1 days ago [-]
Literal Skynet may be something, but "meh"?
willy_k 1 days ago [-]
Grok? Lmao
Edit: Starlink is cool
pfdietz 1 days ago [-]
A million AI server satellites.
willy_k 1 days ago [-]
How are they AI servers? Afaik they’re really fancy wifi repeaters with possibly some discrete fancy sensing for military co use.
pfdietz 24 hours ago [-]
I'm not talking about current Starlink satellites, but rather the server satellites they're planning.
willy_k 21 hours ago [-]
Ah, it’s a handy way to avoid land acquisition hassle, however when it comes to economic and thermodynamic feasibility the situation sounds a lot like (these) flying cars.
pfdietz 19 hours ago [-]
There's been some ignorant BS about them not being feasible due to cooling. Ignore it.
As for economics, it depends on Starship achieving high flight rates and very low costs.
albatross79 1 days ago [-]
A grifter scamming money from fools, I almost want him to do more of this.
dgellow 1 days ago [-]
Why? He’s using his wealth to destroy US institutions
1 days ago [-]
epolanski 1 days ago [-]
Musk treating delusional fans like an ATM as always, lovely.
There's 1000 people that preordered their Roadster in 2017 for 250k $....
And they are rumoring now 2028 production, which in Tesla style will be deep in 2030s. If it ever happens.
1 days ago [-]
r0ckarong 1 days ago [-]
It has vapor thrusters to glide above the ignorant fools who didn't buy one.
delichon 1 days ago [-]
You'll have about 4 to 11 seconds to gloat.
ambicapter 1 days ago [-]
But I can do it every 6 to 8 hours!
JSR_FDED 1 days ago [-]
Very briefly, before coming back down to earth.
unstatusthequo 1 days ago [-]
Great way to get $250k interest free loans from suckers with too much hopium and not enough class to get the Mission S.
bamboozled 1 days ago [-]
I love that the FSD feature still hasn't been delivered while they're demonstrating they're next idiotic product idea / stunt...no one mentions it.
LewisVerstappen 1 days ago [-]
[flagged]
darth_avocado 1 days ago [-]
Can you take a nap while on FSD? If not, it’s not FSD
At this point if you’re able to afford FSD and you choose not to for politics, you’re just making your life worse and less safe for silly reasons. Fine by me as I get driven around in my tank, except for the fact I have to be inconvenienced by human-caused wrecks and my insurance is higher to subsidize them.
amanaplanacanal 1 days ago [-]
What he delivered is not what he promised.
treis 1 days ago [-]
At some point why does anyone care? If something "amazing" was delivered what's the difference if it was exactly as promised.
bamboozled 1 days ago [-]
People he has been conning people out of money for 10 years ?
BoggleOhYeah 1 days ago [-]
Most of us aren't nihilists.
bamboozled 1 days ago [-]
Recently the name of the producet was updated to be called "FSD (Supervised), ffs, even if it was delivered, it was called FSD in 2017...basically 10 years ago.
mbesto 1 days ago [-]
I have a power plant on my roof at home. See what I did there?
FireBeyond 1 days ago [-]
It's getting near to winter. Take your FSD Tesla to Pittsburgh (complete with poor street painting, and potholes) or Montreal, wait for a nice snowing night.
Report back to us how well your FSD Tesla gets you across town with no interventions. We'll be ready to hear the glowing review.
yoyohello13 1 days ago [-]
[dead]
ourmandave 1 days ago [-]
Wasn't it purpose built for the Hot Wheels demo?
Insane acceleration to get up the ramp and enough fuel to land safely.
Unless you have a giant ramp or a penchant to drive off cliffs who is lining up for this?
jefftk 1 days ago [-]
> Insane acceleration to get up the ramp
It climbed the ramp very slowly. It doesn't require insane acceleration at all, just a reasonable amount of power at the wheels combined with a fan that can hold it to the track.
ourmandave 1 days ago [-]
Sorry, I'd only heard a 0 to 60 mph in 1 second and assumed. =[
I suppose the Fast and Furious guys are work shopping a scene around this.
jefftk 1 days ago [-]
If you have not watched the ramp video, I really recommend it. It's very impressive, even if it doesn't make any sense in a consumer vehicle.
HarHarVeryFunny 1 days ago [-]
It's copying the McMurtry Spéirling - a production race car that can also hold it's own weight upside down via the same fan mechanism.
You can hear it in the voices of the creators, when they're giving an overview of the car to MotorWeek and other car media outlets. 99% focused on the rocket and battery tech/innovation, almost zero about the actual driving characteristics of the car, or that it -is- a car. Seems more like a rolling marketing mule.
Based on the specs, I wouldn't compare the (non-existing) roadster to regular electric cars, but rather to something like the McMurtry Spéirling, which also has active downforce. It's not about range, but acceleration and cornering speed.
I love adrenaline, and a 2s (or less) 0-60 time is exhilarating. But a 3s isn't much less fun, and on a commute, is not practically any different.
That's your conclusion.
> Most people with performance cars love going 0-60mph, at least here in the USA.
I drive in traffic and I care a lot more about handling than I do about 0-60 which you rarely if ever will do without a car in front of you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpJ0uzjoaVs
And then I get the joys, living near a base, of 19 year old E-2s with base Challengers thinking they have a "performance car" and constantly wanting to race me.
At this point, the Roadster doesn't exist either, at least as a production car. The sibling comment lists several potential competitors. My guess is that if the Roadster somehow draws a bunch of new pre-orders, there will be more by 2028.
It's about right there with other sports cars rated ranges; 911/M4 get around 300-350 and the Corvette hits 400ish.
a road rally from LA to LV is 270ish miles. What else do you need a hyper-car-thing for?
Now we just need to get some goofy Musk tunnels involved so there's a reason to have the fan suction.
(aside from breaking the windows of traffic behind you with road debris)
They also enable the insane launch traction needed for the non thrust 0-60.
It's the key to the cars performance.
There should be legal investigations into this practice, because it’s extremely deceptive.
This isn’t a comment on your broader point.
It got to the point where even Tesla's lawyers had to get involved, and numerous reports from Tesla disclaim that "Elon Musk's statements are aspirational and may not reflect engineering realities".
That’s even worse then, because it was supposed to be released by 2020. Here we are in 2026 and I still don’t think it’s possible to cram 200kwh into a sports car. I take this as an admission straight from the horse’s mouth that either: 1) they were lying and had no intention of shipping the car as specified when it was announced, or 2) they’re completely inept at making predictions about the trajectory of technology core to their products. Both are extremely bad.
Someone add that to the list of bullshit he said.
If you believe what you write, it’s easy money for you. Deal?
Note that the only version of the car that could conceivably be street legal is the base one with downforce fan only, and no cold thruster launch (boost) - NTSB is never going to approve throwing out a condensation cloud smokescreen on the highway!
Yes, and note that this has already happened: the original Roadster v2 from 2017 never shipped and was replaced with this one.
And that $50k deposit made 9 years ago? That could have been nearly $300k in 2036.
"A fool and his money..."
I don't have any particular problem with a modest (a few 10s of thousands) deposit on a ~3 year timeline that's reasonably confident. But six figures on a 100% speculative consumer good (ie not even remotely an investment)? Oof, no thanks.
He tweeted back in 2019 there would be a flying roadster.
Promises made, promises kept?
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1083095876392964096
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1083128521801822213
Broken clock, etc.
https://elonmusk.today/#flying-roadster
The Trabant often had wait lists of ten or more years[1][2].
The Soviet Lada often had wait times of five to ten years[3].
Even the Morgan Plus 8 had wait lists of (reportedly) a decade long as recently as 1990[4].
[1] - https://doi.org/10.1093/hwj/dbp016 [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabant [3] - https://theses.gla.ac.uk/71079/1/10390647.pdf [4] - https://www.morganville.org/history/the-waiting-list
Usually, if you had been unable to deliver a product in that time, it's probably about time to cancel it. Of course, I may be wrong, but my understanding is that 9-year-ago-announced Roadster has not been cancelled, and people have not been refunded.
> Usually, if you had been unable to deliver a product in that time, it's probably about time to cancel it.
Why? Seems like demand (in this case) is sufficient enough to still launch the product. If a business has the demand for the product and sufficient capital to continue investing in an area they deem to have a viable product, isn't that their prerogative?
[0] - https://podscripts.co/podcasts/waveform-the-mkbhd-podcast/wh...
[0] https://arstechnica.com/cars/2025/10/sam-altman-wants-a-refu...
And then this year Musk's band of merry clowns announces that they've "completely redesigned the windows" because, I shit you not, "Turns out there’s a lot of infrastructure in the world, whether it’s a badge reader, or your toll booth, or you’re talking to somebody on a call box. There’s all kinds of stuff right at that height, and it became evident that we needed a roll-down window in order to make that infrastructure easier to interface with."
Spectacular R&D on which to tie your mission critical infrastructure to. Oh, and the charger network, "still a 'hurdle'", says an anonymous Tesla employee in a feat of understatement.
It was so ridiculous that people would buy the car in the US and bring it here. Other people gave up and started importing 30 year old Japanese minivans — I see JDM minivans relatively commonly now.
As such an X year wait for a car isn't new even outside the dysfunctional communist block.
However I'm pretty sure Toyota will deliver eventually, can't say the same for the Roadster.
You’ve got to be kidding. If your point is that waiting lists for cars can exist, I concede that. I see no other parallels.
Because I can't believe anyone would seriously make a comparison to a 55+ year old car manufactured in a communist country.
It's like saying that an email server that takes a week to send emails is fine because the wait times for a posted letter in the 1960s could take 2 weeks.
As for the rest, this is the Internet, and a cat may look at a king.
It's like a sucker's (or a fraudster's) war cry to say that the people who are already hooked into a venture are the only ones who should be allowed to point out that it might be a scam.
Elon's M.O. is to roll his tapped-out prior ventures (including debts) into the current white-hot thing.
> Elon's M.O. is to roll his tapped-out prior ventures (including debts) into the current white-hot thing.
SpaceX is the long game. It started before Tesla. It is not a fly by night operation.
"It's completely different than what you're talking about"
"Guys...who even cares?"
> Because the sky high IPO valuable was mostly based on SpaceX being an AI company that has a huge TAM
OK, but why do you care so much about that? Are you disadvantaged or harmed in some way? I'm truly trying to understand because it seems to me many of these arguments are not really oriented around deepening understanding or changing minds, but rather about the boring business of standing one's ground and repeating the same arguments (and I'm thinking both of FOR and AGAINST positions). It is just so dull.
Is it because you are a SpaceX shareholder and you feel your interests as a shareholder are undermined? If you have not vested interest in SpaceX, why would you care that it supports some shitty venture like Twitter/X?
I don't understand.
a) to understand why people are so worked up about this man and his antics. I think it is very interesting because it can also reveal something about myself.
b) interesting, novel conversation that broadens understanding
I don't care about the man or his antics or predictable conversations that are boring.
But I think you've hit on something true: I should just move on and let people churn on this stuff and don't get entangled myself. Thanks for pointing it out.
(1) because he is currently (I believe) the wealthiest man in the world
(2) because he uses that wealth to influence politics across the globe, from Germany and the UK to the United States
(3) that - and this is my opinion - this influence should be illegal
(4) that he has a long history of lying, overpromising, under delivering, not withstanding his other achievements
(5) that he is in bed with the current US administration which is doing a lot of damage inside the United States.
(6) that he personally took on roles in that government and did a lot of damage outside of the United States
(7) That he was very much a darling of the left leaning portion of society and used that position to enrich himself and then did a 180 and aligned himself directly and openly with various extreme right parties all over the world. Some people feel betrayed.
So Musk elicits a lot of emotions, for better or for worse.
Does that help?
I assumed he ordered his Starlink-lackeys (also a group of self-serving cowards, in my opinion from the point of view on my high horse) because he wanted to remain/get back on Trump's good graces...
I wonder how those employees feel and why they didn't refuse the order. Let him do it himself.
That'd be funny. An insurance where if you want to make a claim, you just get met with a Grok-bot that'll do the airbnb-style fucking to you (ignore the complaints, minimize them, be as stupid and slow as possible, and offer 10% of the refund that the complainant will frustratedly take as "at least it's something").
The dialog of the event spelled it out.
"We are here at SpaceX's uh rocket test and development center in McGregor, Texas. It's 4,000 acres. Thank you for having us. Thank you for hosting us, SpaceX."
Establishes SpaceX as a giant.
"we're 20 years from when Elon first introduced the Roadster to the world. And it was really a proof of concept that proved EVs were viable product, fun to drive, could go the distance."
Establishes Elon/Tesla as an innovator. Spells out clearly the context "proof of concept." Associates "demonstrations" with "proof." Introduces the concepts of "fun", "viable", and "longevity" aka "distance."
"They were real cars. And look at how far we've come in those 20 years."
Compares introduction of a car, with current demonstration, and establishes the idea that todays "flying car" is going to be just as successful, given time.
"But you know, the last time we had Roadster and SpaceX together, we put Elons's into orbit."
Establishes "the sky as the limit" as to what these two companies can do together. The heart of the entire sales pitch.
"And you can see there, and you know, Starman is still out there somewhere. Amazing feat."
Defines "creating more space junk for publicity stunts" as an "amazing feat."
"you're going to see the results of what happens when you have a collaboration with the world's best car company and the world's best rocket company."
Repetition of the sales pitch to cement it.
"The future is autonomous, Elon, right? Yes. But this is not an autonomous car. It is the last. Well, it it is technically autonomous for this demo to make sure we don't kill anyone. Correct. So, just in case. Uh, but uh this will actually be long-term the only uh manually driven car that Tesla makes. You're going to have some fun sometimes. Yeah. And so, if you're going to have only one manually driven car, let's uh let's take it to the limits and way past the limits."
Confusion. Establishes autonomous with inevitibility. Claims demo car is not automous, then claims it is autonomous, because its dangerous to drive it manually. Plants the idea that its the only car you're gonna need, you can drive it manually, and its the ultimate experience.
Then, as everyone is confused, they start the countdown, and the magic show commences.
Either you see the scripted psyop aka sales pitch or you don't.
We all watched the same demo.
Some of us saw an amazing future.
The rest of us saw a circus selling timeshare condos.
Tesla and SpaceX are "engineering companies." Engineering is at the heart of what they do.
Wouldn't you have more confidence, if they had engineered something useful for a demonstration as an investor, instead of the song and dance ?
Companies are supposed to produce useful products to generate profits, which is why investors invest, right ?
To me it looks like they are out of actual real useful ideas. If they had a new useful idea why didn't we see it ?
I think this might have lowered institutional investor confidence because it looks like a vegas show and smells like a tourist pump and dump intended to capture the "retail publics" money.
You can do better Elon. I know you can.
ps. I am a Starlink subscriber, and I love the service. Please don't cancel me.
That was perfect.
(How many layers of sarcasm does this comment have...)
My intention was to demonstrate the intent behind the demonstration, as physics says this is 100+ times more inefficient than a business jet, and will never fly more than 5 miles given its current size. Thats not me, thats PHYSICS.
This was a sales pitch for a corporate merger, not a product launch.
This is financial engineering.
So by "do better" I meant, think longer term, solve a real problem. They have the resources, and the talent, and we got a donkey show.
Instead of S3XY cars we get stunts. Solar roofs, Concept car roadsters, and of course humanoid robots.
If only Tesla would be interested in cars again.
Edit: Starlink is cool
As for economics, it depends on Starship achieving high flight rates and very low costs.
There's 1000 people that preordered their Roadster in 2017 for 250k $....
And they are rumoring now 2028 production, which in Tesla style will be deep in 2030s. If it ever happens.
Report back to us how well your FSD Tesla gets you across town with no interventions. We'll be ready to hear the glowing review.
Insane acceleration to get up the ramp and enough fuel to land safely.
Unless you have a giant ramp or a penchant to drive off cliffs who is lining up for this?
It climbed the ramp very slowly. It doesn't require insane acceleration at all, just a reasonable amount of power at the wheels combined with a fan that can hold it to the track.
I suppose the Fast and Furious guys are work shopping a scene around this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lJVHdWHK8M