Search results

I’ll let you know if it works on our 80A LCHCS once I’m home.

But is it faster than this guy?

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jul/05/the-vehicle-suddenly-accelerated-with-our-baby-in-it-the-terrifying-truth-about-why-teslas-cars-keep-crashing

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a65266446/lucid-air-sapphire-vs-porsche-taycan-turbo-gt-test-results/

I like Wallbox Pulsar Plus due to their extra features, like power limiting based on the current in the panel, etc. I also have the LCHCS which works great for charging fast when I forget to plug in overnight (which happens more than I’d like to admit)

Suddenly draining your battery sounds delicious

I thought the cameras were fine 🤷‍♂️ But I’m not a videophile 🤣

They just haven’t updated the website. Different teams.

Everyone.

I’ve had zero issues. It has literally been flawless. In fact it’s one of the few home automation pieces I can actually say that about.

Unlink the key fobs from the profile. The key fobs will still work, but they won’t automatically know which profile to load.

The idea was that the pilot panel was for pulling down a more detailed view, more options, etc - that’s why you can swipe the UI up and down from the top screen. It didn’t work out; I agree. But it wasn’t without intention.

Both of these are explained elsewhere in the forum. Please search it in the future. But: 1) splitting the apps between screens is a feature in gravity but doesn’t exist in air yet 2) you can blame the EPA for the driving mode defaulting to Smooth, as their rule is the range is calculated only...

Sorry, I meant window control.

And you can currently use it with Home Assistant for both Air and Gravity. They’re probably updating some servers. Who knows

Paging @joec since he has a very vertically-challenged wife.

I don’t think that’s clear at all. It’s possible they simply have many things to care about. I’d keep pushing. But you do you.

Good point on the rash; that’s not in the guidelines. I’d escalate that further, and specifically point out that it isn’t in the excess wear and use guidelines.

13 is my favorite number, and we got #013, so… someone somewhere must like us. :p

I’m not arguing it’s not annoying, but… what part is deceptive? They provided photos and a full report of the damage… I don’t think they should be charging for tiny things like that, but… it doesn’t seem deceptive to me, as it’s outlined in the excess wear and use guidelines.