Recent content by jsharpe

I'll agree the suggestions already been mentioned but also go in a somewhat different direction. Once you realized you were consuming much faster than expected, if you had the option of swinging by a fast DC charger (e.g. EA 350kW) a relatively painless ~10 minute stop on the way back could...

For me the 517 mile range means an effective range of about 360 miles since I would prefer not to trigger the slower rates over 80% while on a trip and still get uncomfortable going into single digits at the bottom. Starting with only 400 miles would reduce that effective range to 280. Which...

:). It's amazing how little things can spark a conversation. Yesterday about 3pm someone in one of the Bronco forums someone posted a completely useless message that Ford will be sending out a message to all message holders today. As I write this about 16hrs later that thread 40 pages long...

All the production quality niggles referenced in this and other threads don't seem all that different to what many other automotive manufacturers sometimes experience. The difference is that other brands seem to sell them anyway and then fix the issues on the fly with future updates. That is...

I feel the same way about the side glass. The crazy bulky roof rails wouldn't bother me as much, or at all, if they had been positioned more in the top plane of the roof rather than down the side. I could easily live with a slightly less wide "sunroof" but lower tops to the side windows isn't...

Oops. forgot to include the other pic. Although while I'm at it, the mass of those roof rails is a bit ridiculous. :oops: I understand some of the need given the large glass roof, but maybe the reliance on aluminum could better be focused elsewhere. And I doubt very much if modifying the...

In the still image for the video in the post above there is an example of internal panel misalignment on the C pillar. (Look just past his nose). For a test mule no big deal, for a car that is being shown to the press while touting that it was built on the production line, it seems like a miss...

+1 on everything you said. Especially about the restraint of the Lucid interior and the excellence of their engineering (rear footwells excepted). I really don't care for any brand's quilted upholstery and can't wait for that 70's throwback pimp-mobile fad to die. Although I suppose this...

I totally agree about the toe room under the front seats. I can envision that a combination of that, a slightly higher bottom cushion and even a small amount of adjustable recline for the seat backs would go a long way to addressing the lack of the deeper footwell, which I still would have...

Does the rear seat in the Air recline? While the additional thigh support in the EQS knees-up position might be helpful, the slope of the seat bottom makes the angle between it and the seat back look very narrow and I doubt I would be comfortable if the EQS seat back couldn't be angled more...

“Overly-aggressive” was a good way to describe that particular car. :) It was a strong enough affect that lifting off the accelerator when approaching a stop sign at 25mph would cause my passengers heads to throw forward. On the flip side, I never cease to be thrilled with the torque...

Yes, it was specific to that individual car. But since it wasn’t mine I didn’t want to go changing settings. I don’t think the owners were even aware that the behavior wasn’t “normal” and had just gotten used to it.

+1 on everything you said with one qualification. I had the displeasure of driving a model Y with a misconfigured 1-pedal mode and it was completely horrible. It was way too aggressive when lifting on the pedal at low speed and basically impossible to do any reasonable kind of "civilized"...

That's huge news for me. Hopefully they can figure out out to relocate those cells. I would be happy to lose some storage space in order to free up the rear foot well. lMO since they mainly want to compare the Air to a Mercedes S-Class as opposed to a Tesla Model S that is something that must...