CanyonAg77 said:

---

Maybe a dumb question, but does the FSD work in rural area? If I were to buy a ranch off grid in West Texas, would it be able to find me and get me to town?

What about private roads. If it's 5 miles from my sumptuous house on Internet Millionaire Ranch to the highway, will it know where to go?

If your Tesla can drive me to the Big City for doctor's appointments, it greatly expands the places I can live as an old fart, without worrying about medical care being close by

---

Tesla does not have LIDAR. it is not relying on GPS for steering or anything like that. Just navigation.

As I said earlier, my driveway is 1/4 mile single lane asphalt in a very rural setting. I frequently have tree branches fall down, etc. . It will run over small branches but will steer to avoid the large ones. My neighborhood to the main road is two lane asphalt private road (not county maintained) for about a mile with no paint markings or curbs. I have driven on dirt roads with FSD before and I have seen videos of guys on gravel roads, etc... It should be fine.

I also drove it down to our house on the Ga Coast and that is VERY rural. Did not have a problem there either.

I've never had an issue. Q: if you look on Google maps, are the roads you are concerned about on the map?

I do like people providing additional data points of how FSD is safer than humans by explaining how they intentionally cut people off that are leaving a safe space from the vehicle in front of them

I'm just doing hypothetical, don't have plans to buy a Tesla for foreseeable future. But as I said, I'm already an old fart

As I get older and the tech gets better, buying one gets more attractive

If it memorizes routes and shares info, sound like the best thing to do would be to drive the route by hand a few times, if it is a private road.

Kansas Kid said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Red Pear Felipe said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

ToddyHill said:

---

I'm on my third VW. All of them were turbocharged with manual transmissions. I guess I've been fortunate because the first two easily surpassed 200,000 miles and my current one has 100,000 miles.

That said, I would love to own a Tesla model S.

---

Were they diesels?

Important part of the equation.

---

And were you doing 5K oil changes instead of the dealer recommended 10K oil changes. My VW mechanic said that 10K were the worst thing to happen.

I own a Ford Mach E (I refuse to call it a mustang) and it's been humming along without any issues. Only thing I've done was a recall for the the High Voltage Junction Box. I've seen reports with these cars easily going over 150K and still keeping about 85-90% of their battery life.

---

Your mechanic is trying to sell you oil changes.

Fully synthetic oil can go far beyond 10k miles before you get enough shear to see the oil begin to degrade to a point that it no longer does the job it is designed to do. Even oil filters now are designed for 8k-10k lifespans. I've done oil changes at 20k for close to 25 years now on my diesels. Every one of them has gone well over 200k miles without any issue. The one I had before this I sold with 412k and it still ran like a champ, and I still regret selling it. My current truck just rolled 200k on the odometer.

---

Put differently, if it was an issue, the automakers would still require oil changes at 3-5k for warranties to be valid. It would reduce their claims and drive more business to their dealerships.

The non synthetic oils absolutely needed changed every 3-5k because the viscosity adders would break down along with the oil.

---

3k was a holdover from antiquated technology where engine oils were pretty much just pure petroleum pulled from the distillation column on the lower end. Even conventional oils today can go 10k without any problems (with normal driving) because of the additives every manufacturer puts in them.

But still, full synthetic all the way.

tk for tu juan said:

---

I do like people providing additional data points of how FSD is safer than humans by explaining how they intentionally cut people off that are leaving a safe space from the vehicle in front of them

---

I have pulled an RV through some major cities. (Atlanta). What I see as a reasonable following distance/cushion while towing six tons, other drivers see as an opportunity

The worse part is if I'm using the adaptive cruise, my pickup will hit the brakes hard when I get cut off

Medaggie said:

---

I am 80% FSD driving the past 20K miles. Under FSD, never close to an accident. I am confident that if all cars had FSD, accidents would plummet and death pushing towards zero.

I see bad driving on a daily basis and zero bad driving under 20K miles of FSD. FSD do make maneuvers that I shake my head BUT never dangerous.

---

If everybody drove like teslas do with FSD, a normal 30 minute drive to work would take me at least an hour because everybody would get progressively slower as more vehicles entered the road and left more and more space between each one.

Hard pass, I like having control and being able to stop and fill up in 10 minutes. But that's me.

*I will say that if the auto driving was able to manage merging properly using the zipper method, I might be talked into it having some positive qualities

Kansas Kid said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

I don't voluntarily ride in death traps.

---

So you are saying the technology sucks without any knowledge or data to support your positions. I'm not shocked with your claims on this thread.

PS. I think the last bit of FSD is a ways away such as knowing to go to a keypad to get into a gated neighborhood but for 99+% of the time, the system is already better than the vast majority of drivers on the road today. It doesn't drive drunk, tired, distracted or failing to see a blind spot.

---

He gets his jollies from trolling ev threads. We've all got our thing I guess.

schmellba99 said:

---

Medaggie said:

---

I am 80% FSD driving the past 20K miles. Under FSD, never close to an accident. I am confident that if all cars had FSD, accidents would plummet and death pushing towards zero.

I see bad driving on a daily basis and zero bad driving under 20K miles of FSD. FSD do make maneuvers that I shake my head BUT never dangerous.

---

If everybody drove like teslas do with FSD, a normal 30 minute drive to work would take me at least an hour because everybody would get progressively slower as more vehicles entered the road and left more and more space between each one.

Hard pass, I like having control and being able to stop and fill up in 10 minutes. But that's me.

*I will say that if the auto driving was able to manage merging properly using the zipper method, I might be talked into it having some positive qualities

---

That's what made max mode is for. Extremely aggressive driving

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

Kansas Kid said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

I don't voluntarily ride in death traps.

---

So you are saying the technology sucks without any knowledge or data to support your positions. I'm not shocked with your claims on this thread.

PS. I think the last bit of FSD is a ways away such as knowing to go to a keypad to get into a gated neighborhood but for 99+% of the time, the system is already better than the vast majority of drivers on the road today. It doesn't drive drunk, tired, distracted or failing to see a blind spot.

---

He gets his jollies from trolling ev threads. We've all got our thing I guess.

---

I get it. He and a few others love trolling non stop on a number of topics. I just like highlighting their willful ignorance and lack of intellectual honesty. I guess I am trolling and those types of posters.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2025/02/11/tesla-again-has-the-highest-accident-rate-of-any-auto-brand/

https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/brand-incidents-study/

Are y'all just comparing Feax Self Driving Teslas to non?

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Maybe a dumb question, but does the FSD work in rural area? If I were to buy a ranch off grid in West Texas, would it be able to find me and get me to town?

What about private roads. If it's 5 miles from my sumptuous house on Internet Millionaire Ranch to the highway, will it know where to go?

If your Tesla can drive me to the Big City for doctor's appointments, it greatly expands the places I can live as an old fart, without worrying about medical care being close by

---

Everyone's idea of rural is a bit different, and I'd have a tough time trusting it in some situations but they have shown some pretty impressive results to date.

Tesla Autopilot Navigates Insane Mountain Cliff Road in Wuxi, China

pic.twitter.com/LKXlcUMyGs

— Hope 🕊️ (@MrMakiri) June 6, 2026

I think they are in all seriousness a lot safer in rural/wet conditions vs. their nearest competitor in the space, waymo, which I've seen too many videos showing their vehicles driving into a flood/danger etc.

TexasRebel said:

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2025/02/11/tesla-again-has-the-highest-accident-rate-of-any-auto-brand/

https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/brand-incidents-study/

Are y'all just comparing Feax Self Driving Teslas to non?

---

LOL... that study doesn't say anything about FSD being involved in those accidents!

Try again!.

BMW is #1 in that study. So perhaps it is the drivers?! Did that thought ever cross your mind? In fact it says this.......:

"BMW and Tesla drivers have many high-performance vehicles, which can tempt their owners to drive too fast or take other chances on the road,

TexasRebel said:

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2025/02/11/tesla-again-has-the-highest-accident-rate-of-any-auto-brand/

https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/brand-incidents-study/

Are y'all just comparing Feax Self Driving Teslas to non?

---

Tried searching for data. Tesla drivers on the whole have a lot of accidents, but these cars have Ferrari like acceleration. There is no independently verifiable data for FSD only driving. Tesla reports FSD is 7X safer but there are obvious flaws in its claim.

- bias
- mostly engaged in the easy drivng areas and disengaged by drivers in difficult situations
- monitored by human drivers. it could mess up but the human corrects it before a crash occurs.

Where can I buy a new Pontiac or Mercury? With such a low incident rate they must be awesome, great selling vehicles

The sleeping human?

TexasRebel said:

---

The sleeping human?

---

You cannot sleep in a Tesla with FSD. It will literally pull over on the side of the road after a few minutes of inattention

How bored does a person have to be to drive without driving?

TexasRebel said:

---

How bored does a person have to be to drive without driving?

---

I watch midget porn. It's much better than driving.

No actually, I was driving back from a funeral. Aggie baseball was playing. I was on I-16 in South Georgia - very straight and rural. It was awesome. I have also watched movies on long trips. I have a phone holder that puts the phone just at the edge where the interior camera won't complain if I'm looking at my phone. I don't watch in urban environments and pay attention when there is any sort of traffic, I need to pay attention to.

But I missed out on the exhilaration of driving in a straight line at 80 mph for hours on end.

I also drink coffee and listen to Bloomberg/podcasts on the drive in to work every day. And eating fast food while FSD is a game changer - you can use two hands.

GeorgiAg said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2025/02/11/tesla-again-has-the-highest-accident-rate-of-any-auto-brand/

https://www.lendingtree.com/insurance/brand-incidents-study/

Are y'all just comparing Feax Self Driving Teslas to non?

---

Tried searching for data. Tesla drivers on the whole have a lot of accidents, but these cars have Ferrari like acceleration. There is no independently verifiable data for FSD only driving. Tesla reports FSD is 7X safer but there are obvious flaws in its claim.

- bias
- mostly engaged in the easy drivng areas and disengaged by drivers in difficult situations
- monitored by human drivers. it could mess up but the human corrects it before a crash occurs.

---

schmellba99 said:

---

Medaggie said:

---

I am 80% FSD driving the past 20K miles. Under FSD, never close to an accident. I am confident that if all cars had FSD, accidents would plummet and death pushing towards zero.

I see bad driving on a daily basis and zero bad driving under 20K miles of FSD. FSD do make maneuvers that I shake my head BUT never dangerous.

---

If everybody drove like teslas do with FSD, a normal 30 minute drive to work would take me at least an hour because everybody would get progressively slower as more vehicles entered the road and left more and more space between each one.

Hard pass, I like having control and being able to stop and fill up in 10 minutes. But that's me.

*I will say that if the auto driving was able to manage merging properly using the zipper method, I might be talked into it having some positive qualities

---

I actually think if all car was on FSD, it would shorten your commute time with less hard stops. I drove on hurry today and it went in/out of traffic like a pro.

When I hear people tell me that Waymo, Mercedes, Ford, Rivian and whoever else has "FSD" similar, I just laugh. Put any of these cars on this cliff and it would probably never move or kill you.

I find it fascinating how computers handle so many technical tasks that humans could never do as well but yet we don't think they can drive better?

You do understand computers can't do anything better than humans, just the same things faster.

TexasRebel said:

---

Where is my compensation for risking my life in this beta test?

You probably also have things like lines on the road.

…and pavement.

---

Strawman. You'd have to be claiming the driver has no ability to take back control to be claiming the driver is risking their life. Argue the facts as they are, not how you wish they were to try and win an argument.

TexasRebel said:

---

I don't voluntarily ride in death traps.

---

False. Computers are better - and faster - than humans at pattern recognition in finite, closed domains, That's why computers curb stomp grand masterrs at chess. You could give humans unlimited time for moves and they would still lose.

TexasRebel said:

---

You do understand computers can't do anything better than humans, just the same things faster.

---

Huh? Now I know you are just trolling. Bravo.

Just take Chess. A computer has an ELO of 3900+. Magnus, the best player in the world, peaks at 2900. A 1000+ elo difference would mean out of 1000 games, Magnus would be lucky to win 1 match.

This would be like Magnus playing against a good amateur player. He would never lose.

But keep telling yourself that computers are not better at anything.

Spelling bees, any math contest. Computers today would read EKGs better than most doctors, CT/Xrays than most radiologists. The list goes on and on.

If you put the best F1 driver against a computer, this would not even be close. Human hand eye coordination is not where near as good as a computer.

TexasRebel said:

---

You do understand computers can't do anything better than humans, just the same things faster.

---

You can't ignore time as a constraint and with time as a constraint there's lots of things computers do better.

Time is not a constraint in pure precision. A computer will never be able to do something a human can't do - - full stop.

A computer just allows things that may have historically taken a lifetime or more to be completed in minutes.

Faster, but not better.

TexAgs91 said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

Where is my compensation for risking my life in this beta test?

You probably also have things like lines on the road.

…and pavement.

---

Strawman. You'd have to be claiming the driver has no ability to take back control to be claiming the driver is risking their life. Argue the facts as they are, not how you wish they were to try and win an argument.

---

I thought this was a fully-self-driving vehicle,
…but only if you drive it?

hph6203 said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

You do understand computers can't do anything better than humans, just the same things faster.

---

You can't ignore time as a constraint and with time as a constraint there's lots of things computers do better.

---

This sounds really cool if you imagine Matthew McConaughey's voice saying it.

Medaggie said:

---

TexasRebel said:

---

You do understand computers can't do anything better than humans, just the same things faster.

---

Huh? Now I know you are just trolling. Bravo.

Just take Chess. A computer has an ELO of 3900+. Magnus, the best player in the world, peaks at 2900. A 1000+ elo difference would mean out of 1000 games, Magnus would be lucky to win 1 match.

This would be like Magnus playing against a good amateur player. He would never lose.

But keep telling yourself that computers are not better at anything.

Spelling bees, any math contest. Computers today would read EKGs better than most doctors, CT/Xrays than most radiologists. The list goes on and on.

If you put the best F1 driver against a computer, this would not even be close. Human hand eye coordination is not where near as good as a computer.

---

Chess is a depth game.
Allow Magnus to play the position out, flawlessly, thousands of times in a few minutes and it's a different game. The computer is not making moves the human can't make, it just doesn't get hungry or behind on rent.

If you think a computer can be a better driver than a human, stick it in Argentina, China, or a double diverging diamond interchange.

Logos Stick said:

---

False. Computers are better - and faster - than humans at pattern recognition in finite, closed domains, That's why computers curb stomp grand masterrs at chess. You could give humans unlimited time for moves and they would still lose.

---

I would win. Just upload a virus and/or let off a neutron bomb.

Or have a lesser time traveling chess robot come to help you defeat the better chess robot. Chess Terminator. Sounds like a great movie idea.

Time is always a constraint. If a computer can do something in an hour that would take more than a lifetime for a person the computer is objectively doing it better, because it is doing it to completion while the human may do all the steps correctly (they won't) until their death they still do not finish.

A computer will spend all its time making the mistakes a human programmed it with, and never figure it out.

Time is not a constraint on precision, only on what you will see before you die.