Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

60 Minutes Dubbed Engines Noise Over Tesla Model S

timothy posted about 6 months ago | from the at-least-they-didn't-detonate-it dept.

The Media 544

cartechboy (2660665) writes "Did you watch the Tesla 60 Minutes segment the other night? If you did, you might have ended up on the floor rolling around laughing like I did. Since when does the Tesla Model S electric car make audible engine noises? Or downshift? Turns out, 60 Minutes dubbed engine noises and a downshift over the Model S running footage. The show claims it was an editing error. Call it what you want, it was absolutely hilarious. A little note to TV producers assigned to cover Tesla Motors in the future: Electric cars don't upshift or downshift." At least they didn't fraudulently blow it up!

cancel ×

544 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Top Gear was worse. (4, Informative)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 6 months ago | (#46649255)

At least they didn't fraudulently claim the battery went flat during a test run.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (2, Insightful)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 6 months ago | (#46649359)

Considering that the report was a complete Elon Musk worshiping puff piece, I doubt Tesla will complain too much. I half expected it to end with Steve Kroft asking for a towel to clean the spooge off his face.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (3, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | about 6 months ago | (#46649597)

Have you been in one? Man, they are beautiful, fun as hell to drive, great acceleration.
I wish I could afford one.
I didn't see the 60 minutes piece, but I can't think of anything practical to complain about.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (5, Interesting)

glasshole (3569269) | about 6 months ago | (#46649739)

Having driven one extensively, it is kinda fun, but not in the sense that a Porsche Cayman is fun. It goes very fast off the line, but it is hard to hide its rather ample weight. Same deal with the Tesla Roadster too, having owned the chassis mate Lotus Exige for several years, the experiences weren't comparable.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (1, Troll)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 6 months ago | (#46649743)

the overly large and gawdy lcd 'laptop screen' in the console.

deal-breaker for me.

can't get beyond it. hate hate HATE the whole idea of it.

other than that, car is fine. way too many of them in the bay area, though, so it totally lost its exclusive appeal (locally, at least).

it seems that a lot of rich guys bought them (I'm guessing) mostly for ego/show status and also for the commuter lane sticker. the rich guys just CANNOT stand to be in the non-diamond lanes like the rest of us and so they pay extra for a car that can get the diamond lane sticker and zoom by us on the way to work. buying your way into a carpool lay seems quite WRONG to me, but its how its done, now. the rich aren't like us; they really hate to wait....

Re:Top Gear was worse. (1, Flamebait)

Virtucon (127420) | about 6 months ago | (#46649361)

I've heard this before, there was nothing wrong with what Top Gear said in the program. [theguardian.com]

Tesla complained about a passage of Clarkson's commentary in which he said: "Although Tesla say it will do 200 miles, we worked out that on our track it would run out after just 55 miles and if it does run out, it is not a quick job to charge it up again." Clarkson and others are then shown pushing the Roadster into the Top Gear hangar and recharging it.

The British courts have agreed with Top Gear and to be fair to other cars but on the track where they're going full tilt, mileage on gas powered cars isn't the same either so pushing the Tesla resulted in Top Gear making the statement and we know range would be reduced.

For comparison look at their one gallon supercar race. [youtube.com]

YMMV... Sorry Tesla Nutswingers!

Re:Top Gear was worse. (1)

davewoods (2450314) | about 6 months ago | (#46649619)

Woo! Audi R8 has 5 mpg when racing!
I actually find it pretty funny that the worst car had slightly over 1 mpg. I wonder what the cars would get if they were trying to make that gallon last.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (4, Informative)

geekoid (135745) | about 6 months ago | (#46649703)

Did you see the episode? It was, another, excuse to bash on all things American*. The presented t as if it ran out of charge. They really tried to hide the fact that they were not driving the car under normal road conditions.
Clarkson also has a long history of attacking electric cars, and when he is presented with argument, he responds with non sequitors.
I like how the article you linked only links to itself and not to any actual reference to the court case.

*sometime justifiable, but all too often I've seen them do things to American car they don't do to non American cars.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649791)

Richard Hammond has Mustang I believe. Perhaps you'd like to rethink your "anti-American" bias statement.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (2, Informative)

Jhon (241832) | about 6 months ago | (#46649373)

Or fraudulently claim certain documents had been authenticated.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (4, Informative)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649389)

At least they didn't fraudulently claim the battery went flat during a test run.

Can you link to the clip/transcript of the scene where this alleged fraudulent claim occurred? Because I remember watching that episode, and aside from (what I perceived as) the playful "if the battery dies, you'll be doing this" pushing scene toward the end, I don't recall them saying or doing anything that would qualify as fraudulent. The fact that Tesla's lawsuit against the show was settled in a way that still allows the BBC to rebroadcast the episode seems to indicate a lack of fraudulent claims.

Also, in fairness, there's no denying that a "fuse issue" caused the brakes to fail during the Stig's test run - Even Tesla admits that one.

Re:Top Gear was worse. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649611)

At least they didn't factually claim the battery went flat during a test run.

Held up in a court of law.

Lies (5, Insightful)

nwaack (3482871) | about 6 months ago | (#46649267)

There is no way that was an editing error. Someone had to purposefully add those noises to the footage. Please.

Re:Lies (4, Interesting)

seinman (463076) | about 6 months ago | (#46649297)

Every professional editor in the world would add engine noise to a shot of an operating automobile. It's one of those things that you do without even thinking about, because generally you will receive footage (especially if it's b-roll) that has poor audio quality. The editor probably dropped it in like he/she would always do, without stopping to think "hey, that's an electric car, so that silence i'm hearing in the footage SHOULD be there." I would most certainly consider that an editing error.

Re:Lies (5, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649335)

This.

Definitely one of those "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence" situations.

Editor see car, cars make noise, thus, editor add car noise. No conspiracy necessary.

Re:Lies (3, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | about 6 months ago | (#46649651)

This.

Definitely one of those "never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence" situations.

Editor see car, cars make noise, thus, editor add car noise. No conspiracy necessary.

I would hope that an editor for a NEWS SERVICE would have more sense than that. Altering levels, filtering noises, tweaking, balancing yes, but going to a library of sound effects and overlaying foreign audio and sound effects? I would hope they would only do that under orders from above.

Re:Lies (3, Insightful)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 6 months ago | (#46649727)

The GP said "editor" but it's likely to be a generic sound guy who works on numerous projects. Never worked in the industry, but based upon simple observation I think they pretty much work from a library of standard sounds that they add to everything by default.

It's the (computer) mice clicks that always get me. Anyone actually have a mouse that loudly clunks in the way shown on virtually every television show, news show, etc? Even better when the visuals show they're using a laptop's touchpad...

Re:Lies (4, Interesting)

Geoffrey.landis (926948) | about 6 months ago | (#46649757)

I would hope that an editor for a NEWS SERVICE would have more sense than that.

You would hope, but you would be disappointed. Ever seen a news report where something blows up? Have you ever, even once, seen that clip shown on TV where the sound comes after the visible explosion?

Re:Lies (1)

TheCarp (96830) | about 6 months ago | (#46649701)

Not only that but, its not like they add realistic sounds anyway. If you have an exterior shot of a car driving quickly down a road lines with trees, why is the dubbed in "engine sound" more natural there? It isn't what you would hear with the car driving by, it isn't what you would hear if you were magically floating in the air following the car like the camera is.... where is the wind noise? The bumps in the road? Wheels going over sticks? Leaves russling in the wind? Wind noise at the speeds in many of those shots should be loud enough to cause hearing damage over time....nobody faults them for not including that.

Re:Lies (1)

Rinikusu (28164) | about 6 months ago | (#46649811)

"incompetence" is a strong word for this. "Ignorance" is much more appropriate. As the other poster said, if you've been editing for 30 years and are used to having crappy audio sources, this is just the thing you do. And generally speaking, that footage would come with little or no documentation other than "clean this up".

Re:Lies (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649351)

they most likely didn't even know it was for an electric car. They edit footage like an assembly line - receive assets with little to no context, and deliver the output in 5 minutes for someone else to combine the audio with a color graded footage.

Re:Lies (1)

seinman (463076) | about 6 months ago | (#46649399)

This is true. And even if they did know it was electric, they may not know what an electric car sounds like. Until my wife bought a Prius, I had no idea myself; I had never been near enough to a running electric vehicle to hear their sounds.

Re:Lies (5, Insightful)

danheskett (178529) | about 6 months ago | (#46649505)

Agreed that this probably common.

But, the point is, that it's wrong. It's always a fraud on the viewer, even if sometimes it's a small fraud on the viewer. What we are basically saying now is that "it's always a lie, but this time, it's an obvious lie, and so we are sorry".

The process of dubbing in audio, which we know happens frequently, is the problem. It's always a lie.

The answer should be "no more lies". In this case, it's always been a pet peeve. The video shows a middle-aged guy accelerating normally down a city street at 20 or 30 mph. The audio is of an engine hitting redline after slipping the clutch.

Re:Lies (2)

RivenAleem (1590553) | about 6 months ago | (#46649679)

I see no difference between this and a laugh track in a sitcom.

Re:Lies (2)

prefect42 (141309) | about 6 months ago | (#46649819)

Quite, so film in front of a live audience. Red Dwarf is a good example where they switched away from a live audience, and you really notice the damage.

Re:Lies (1)

webbiedave (1631473) | about 6 months ago | (#46649715)

I'm also not ascribing malicious intent but a professional producer should catch it well before air and direct the editor to fix it.

Re:Lies (2)

slapout (93640) | about 6 months ago | (#46649755)

But after the editor did that, shouldn't the reporter who's going to be presenting the final story have watched it to make sure everything was okay?

Re:Lies (2)

Sockatume (732728) | about 6 months ago | (#46649313)

Errors are sometimes purposeful. In this case, probably the editing team were used to dubbing appropriate background noise on footage of cars, because the sound of a distant vehicle would tend to be inaudible.

Re:Lies (1)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 6 months ago | (#46649315)

Maybe the editor accidentally slipped and hit the "Add Car Engine and Transmission Noises" button by mistake. It could happen!

Re:Lies (3, Informative)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 6 months ago | (#46649341)

"Huh, you can't hear the car in this car clip. That's going to be awkward... I'll just add some stock noises in so it sounds normal."

-Some lowly editor

It's easy enough to be an honest mistake by an uninformed individual. Most non-Slashdotters don't know or care about the idiosyncrasies of electric cars.

Re:Lies (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 6 months ago | (#46649607)

It's called "mainstream media." Like stock footage they roll when they're too lazy to go out and film an incident live.

Dubbing car noise over the original footage? (5, Funny)

Sockatume (732728) | about 6 months ago | (#46649275)

I guess you could say they gave it some axle foley.

Re:Dubbing car noise over the original footage? (2)

gaudior (113467) | about 6 months ago | (#46649487)

Like this:
http://youtu.be/1OXjB3-MUcs [youtu.be] /earworm //you're welcome.

Re:Dubbing car noise over the original footage? (1)

pr0t0 (216378) | about 6 months ago | (#46649623)

I wish I could mod you to Score:6, clever/funny/awesome

Re:Dubbing car noise over the original footage? (1)

Anonymous Meoward (665631) | about 6 months ago | (#46649705)

Truly amazing. Thank you.

I assumed sound was from the camera vehicle (5, Interesting)

Kevoco (64263) | about 6 months ago | (#46649279)

I too noticed it and thought it was odd but rationalized it as being the sound of the vehicle carrying the video camera.

This is one thing I love about it (5, Insightful)

ZorinLynx (31751) | about 6 months ago | (#46649287)

Smooth, instant acceleration no matter what your current speed. It's mind blowing when you first experience it.

I don't get how people can "miss" the sound of a regular engine, and having to shift. A good computer analogy would be "missing" having to manually input bootstrap code to get your machine going. Sure, it can be a nice bit of nostalgia, but it's a requirement of antiquated technology that no longer applies in the case of the Model S.

I so wish I could afford that car. I hope they can get the price of its successor down into the 30s; I will jump on that SO quick.

Re:This is one thing I love about it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649585)

There are EVs out there for 30k today. Put your money where your mouth is.

Re:This is one thing I love about it (3, Insightful)

m.ducharme (1082683) | about 6 months ago | (#46649603)

I love having to manually shift, and the engine revving and all that. It's a lot of fun. I'm sure gonna miss it when I finally can afford my new Tesla. It won't stop me buying one though.

Re:This is one thing I love about it (2)

geekoid (135745) | about 6 months ago | (#46649723)

Shifting is fun, and it give a sense of control.

Re:This is one thing I love about it (1)

Ogive17 (691899) | about 6 months ago | (#46649813)

It's more fun for my 1 year old son when we pretend to be driving a race car and I make engine noises while shifting gears.

If I didn't make the sounds, he'd just stare at me with a look like "what the hell are you doing with my arm?"

Because Hollywood. (5, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649305)

The editors who put in car-related audio on all manner of film media are morons, plain and simple.

I mean, these are the same guys that pipe in 'tires screeching on pavement' sounds every time the Duke boys take off, even when they're on gravel or dirt.

Frankly, I'd be far more surprised if they didn't add a bunch of fake engine noises.

Re:Because Hollywood. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649383)

The forgot to edit-in tail-pipe smoke and someone checking dip-stick oil.

Re:Because Hollywood. (2)

DocSavage64109 (799754) | about 6 months ago | (#46649525)

They've been adding fake noise for over 50 years. I was just watching the 1958 movie "Touch of Evil" [imdb.com] and noticed when they added tire-squealing noise to a car turning on desert sand/dirt.

Re:Because Hollywood. (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 6 months ago | (#46649661)

I just figured out Hollywood was doing this maybe a few years ago. I was watching a scene of a guy modestly speeding out of a parking garage and was jarred by the inappropriate tire squealing. Since then, I always look (and find) impossible "hyper" audio cues in movies.

Re:Because Hollywood. (2)

Deadstick (535032) | about 6 months ago | (#46649693)

Speaking of "Airplane!"...

Re:Because Hollywood. (1)

camperdave (969942) | about 6 months ago | (#46649601)

The editors who put in car-related audio on all manner of film media are morons, plain and simple.

I mean, these are the same guys that pipe in 'tires screeching on pavement' sounds every time the Duke boys take off, even when they're on gravel or dirt.

Frankly, I'd be far more surprised if they didn't add a bunch of fake engine noises.

I can see that for fiction shows, but 60 Minutes is a documentary. I would hope that an agency of that calibre (a) wouldn't add sound effects to video and (b) wouldn't hire morons.

Re:Because Hollywood. (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649671)

The editors who put in car-related audio on all manner of film media are morons, plain and simple.

I mean, these are the same guys that pipe in 'tires screeching on pavement' sounds every time the Duke boys take off, even when they're on gravel or dirt.

Frankly, I'd be far more surprised if they didn't add a bunch of fake engine noises.

I can see that for fiction shows, but 60 Minutes is a documentary. I would hope that an agency of that calibre (a) wouldn't add sound effects to video and (b) wouldn't hire morons.

As my dad would say, hope in one hand and shit in the other...

It probably has less to do with the "calibre" of the film group, and more to do with the established editing process - My guess is, post-production editors probably don't get a lot of back story on the videos they're told to edit.

Re:Because Hollywood. (0)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | about 6 months ago | (#46649613)

Great way to generalize you fuckwit. To use Dukes of Hazard to strengthen your argument is just pathetic.

Re:Because Hollywood. (3, Funny)

Artifakt (700173) | about 6 months ago | (#46649633)

What surprises some people is that 60 minutes has the same dedication to facts and accurate reporting as the Dukes of Hazzard. I've stopped being surprised by that.

Re:Because Hollywood. (1)

Deadstick (535032) | about 6 months ago | (#46649689)

They put in what they assume the audience expects to hear. Ever notice that when there's a shooting, witnesses often tell a reporter "I didn't think it was a gunshot...it didn't sound like one"? What they mean is, it didn't sound like a movie gunshot.

CBS is a joke (CNN/ABC/NBS) (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649365)

CBS is full of socialist A$$clowns who lost in the Vietnam war era all sense of what is journalism. Their agenda is transparent and frankly disgusting. Let's not forget Dan Rather who was fired because he flat out made up shit about GWB. I wouldn't piss on CBS if they were on fire.

The noise problem is not just a TV one. (2)

netsavior (627338) | about 6 months ago | (#46649369)

This, combined with something I saw in a parking lot yesterday make me think again about electric cars.
I saw a guy text-walking in a parking lot, he nearly hit by a prius which was in low speed electric mode. (yeah that is a user problem, but the guy wouldn't have walked in front of a glass-packed V8 mustang.)

People expect cars to make noise. Television is a decent example since it just happened, but in real life, cars make noise, which warns peds, motorcycles, bicyclists, and other cars that there is 2 tons of metal, plastic, and rubber about to hit them.



Nearly silent, high performance cars remove one of the basest instinct protections we have against current squids driving fast cars (they are loud, so you know they are doing something stupid even before you see them). I imagine some detroit dinosaur who owns a few dozen politicians could latch on to this and require electrics to make some kind of noise.. which will be pretty funny once the hacker/teenager crowd starts modding them.

Mine will probably play Yakkety Sax until I get a DMCA takedown notice,

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

ThatsDrDangerToYou (3480047) | about 6 months ago | (#46649417)

Please not Yakkety Sax. "Officer, I was totally justified--he was disturbing the peace!"

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649429)

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (4, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | about 6 months ago | (#46649461)

That's actually something that's happening. [wikipedia.org] Apparently it's quite an interesting design challenge: you don't have to make it sound exactly like an automobile, so there's room to produce a "better" sound. One that provides more directional cues, maybe, or carries more consistent information on vehicle speed, or which is subtly distinguishable for each car so that you can better understand a busy street.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (2)

operagost (62405) | about 6 months ago | (#46649747)

Or just sound like KITT, which would be totally boss.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

Mr D from 63 (3395377) | about 6 months ago | (#46649473)

Even gas cars are pretty quiet. I drive up behind parking lot idiots quite often and they don't hear my Camry till I am within several feet.

Its a problem for pedestrians and cyclists. We could just let natural selection solve it for us.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649589)

Even gas cars are pretty quiet. I drive up behind parking lot idiots quite often and they don't hear my Camry till I am within several feet.

I think that's more a pedestrian-with-their-head-up-their-ass issue, as I've had the same thing happen to me while driving my large, 4x4 pickup.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 6 months ago | (#46649655)

Or pedestrians with hearing problems. We exist too.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

BonThomme (239873) | about 6 months ago | (#46649561)

text-walking is an evolutionary dead end

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

Minwee (522556) | about 6 months ago | (#46649641)

Squids driving fast cars isn't such a great idea either.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

Rhipf (525263) | about 6 months ago | (#46649685)

I'm not sure I would call this instinct just a conditioned response. Maybe we just need more quiet cars to finally realize that having your attention on texting isn't always the smarted way to walk.

Re:The noise problem is not just a TV one. (1)

Bomarc (306716) | about 6 months ago | (#46649815)

Not to long ago, I watched as someone was texting -- walked into an intersection (crosswalk) against the (pedestrian) light. The on-coming traffic (with a normal engine) had to stop as to not hit her. As she approached me -- I told her "you just walked against the light and forced that car to stop" ... to which she replied "I'm sorry" and continued what she was doing. (Hey, I'm not the one that is going to get plowed into by not paying attention). Darwin candidate?

The point being: If someone is not paying attention - and walks into the street, engine noise (or lack of it) is not going to make a lot of difference, only an excuse for lawyers after the fact. (He knew his car was quite -- he should have watched out for that pedestrian!)

Not only for Tesla or videos (5, Informative)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | about 6 months ago | (#46649371)

It's not only for Tesla, and not just on videos either.
Engines are getting more efficient and quieter every year, and cars are better insulated as well. Customers are disappointed when they spend big bucks on a car only to find out it doesn't sound like a big old sport car.
The solution? Manufacturers actually add speakers next to the engine, exhaust and inside the car.
You sometimes get V8 sound out of a V6 car :)

http://www.caranddriver.com/fe... [caranddriver.com]

Re:Not only for Tesla or videos (1)

Jhon (241832) | about 6 months ago | (#46649493)

Maybe they could all play "the hamster dance" song as they go down the street? Or maybe loop something from "what the fox says".

"Da ding ding dinga ding" -- "oh, here comes another Tesla!"

Re:Not only for Tesla or videos (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649627)

Obviously the only reasonable solution is to legally mandate that electric car manufacturers put proximity sensors on all their vehicles, that triggers when a pedestrian is within X feet, and plays "Dixie" on the car horn at about 165 db.

The mental image of a sleek, shiny new Tesla blasting that cheesy tune as it rolls up to a crosswalk... priceless.

Re:Not only for Tesla or videos (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 6 months ago | (#46649507)

Even the current generation of F1 cars don't have the noise they used to. People are complaining...

Re:Not only for Tesla or videos (1)

Nyder (754090) | about 6 months ago | (#46649653)

...
The solution? Manufacturers actually add speakers next to the engine, exhaust and inside the car. .../p>

Well, I hope they add speakers inside the car, makes listening to music easier. As for putting speakers next to the engine and exhaust, why would they do that? Does the engine & exhaust need to hear the music also?

I think think they would put a microphone next to the engine and exhaust and hook that to the speakers inside the car, or maybe give it special speakers. But I don't know, maybe your on to something....

Re:Not only for Tesla or videos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649657)

http://www.carscoops.com/2013/03/sounds-like-gt-r-spirit-why-new-renault.html

Re:Not only for Tesla or videos (3, Funny)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 6 months ago | (#46649673)

They should just play Yakety Sax. That makes *everything* speed up!

Continuously variable transmission (2)

slackware 3.6 (2524328) | about 6 months ago | (#46649407)

Cars with CVT don't shift either.

Re:Continuously variable transmission (1)

taiwanjohn (103839) | about 6 months ago | (#46649463)

Is there a transmission in the Tesla S? I thought it was just a virtue of electric motors that they have high torque at all speeds.

Re:Continuously variable transmission (1)

sidevans (66118) | about 6 months ago | (#46649539)

How does the "Continuously variable transmission" work if it doesn't shift gears?

Re:Continuously variable transmission (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649605)

Magic.

Or it uses a pair of cylindrical pyramids that move around.

like this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:GearBoxRotRotVar.gif

Re:Continuously variable transmission (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 6 months ago | (#46649677)

CVT doesn't have gears. Instead, it smoothly "shifts" by making its pulleys wider or narrower. The angled gap that the belt rides on thus gets bigger or smaller, which takes the place of having separate gears.

Re:Continuously variable transmission (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649781)

A CVT still has gears. It can't do reverse without them.

Re:Continuously variable transmission (2)

stjobe (78285) | about 6 months ago | (#46649725)

"A continuously variable transmission (CVT) is a transmission that can change seamlessly through an infinite number of effective gear ratios between maximum and minimum values. This contrasts with other mechanical transmissions that offer a fixed number of gear ratios. The flexibility of a CVT allows the input shaft to maintain a constant angular velocity."
  - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmission [wikipedia.org]

My 2012 Toyota iQ [wikipedia.org] 1.33 has one, and it's the smoothest ride you could ask for. A passenger once commented "You never hear it changing gears", to which I answered "that's because it never does" :)

Re:Continuously variable transmission (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649695)

Cars with CVT don't shift either.

Not true. Subaru's CVT has a manual mode that restricts the transmission to fixed ratios.

http://www.subaruofkeene.com/subaru-cvt-transmission.htm

Maybe, maybe not (1)

TonyJohn (69266) | about 6 months ago | (#46649413)

Electric trains can make noises which sound a lot like a gear change as they change speed. In reality it is changes to the electric control regime. It's still not reasonable to assume that a Tesla will sound the same though.

Kind of states the problem with electric. No noise (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649447)

I think many people find electrics a issue because of the lack of engine noise. So much so, some hybrids pump engine noise through speakers to appease the driver. For me this is the least of the problems I have with all electric vehicles. I personally find their range, inconvenience of long charge times and their unproven longevity down the road. Just does not impress me in the least. Unless we can invent some better ways to store more energy. I think electrics are simply a stop gap niche that will eventually be replaced by a more accepted energy source.
What is proof of this inability to accept electrics, is the fact that even 60 minutes felt the need to edit in engine noises just so as to not make the Tesla boring. My question is, how come Tesla was not upset by this?

Re:Kind of states the problem with electric. No no (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649621)

That's not a problem, it's a massive advantage. If some imbeciles want their cars causing noise pollution, I want them to go fuck themselves with a cactus!

Re:Kind of states the problem with electric. No no (2)

taiwanjohn (103839) | about 6 months ago | (#46649769)

some hybrids pump engine noise through speakers to appease the driver

They do that for safety too, not just to appease the driver. Domino's Pizza in the Netherlands made a marketing coup with this a few years ago when they switched to electric delivery scooters. They added audio of a guy going "VROOoooooommmmmm! Lecker-lecker-lecker... Vrrrooooommmm!" [youtube.com] (Apparently, "lecker" means "yummy" in Dutch.)

invent some better ways to store more energy

There have been MANY teams working on this, for several years, with lots of VC/R&D, and several new products are going to hit the market it the next couple of years: liquid metal batteries [ambri.com] , sodium ion batteries [wikipedia.org] , compressed air storage [lightsail.com] , sodium air batteries [greenoptimistic.com] , artificial leaf [harvard.edu] , another artificial leaf [solarfuelshub.org] , flywheels, super-capacitors, etc... Most of these are intended for grid-level storage, but a few are quite suitable for transportation as well. In particular, sodium-air batteries have the advantage of light weight, since one of their reactants (air) is available on the fly. And the two "artificial leaf" technologies can be used to create fuel from sunlight.

I need ... (1)

PPH (736903) | about 6 months ago | (#46649451)

... the sound track of a floppy boot for my laptop.

Re:I need ... (4, Funny)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#46649635)

I thought I missed the sound of a 28.8k modem establishing a connection, until I set it as my ringtone.

Re:I need ... (1)

Nyder (754090) | about 6 months ago | (#46649669)

... the sound track of a floppy boot for my laptop.

https://www.google.com/#q=yout... [google.com]

Lots of choices.

All cars should be required to make a Vrrumm sound (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649453)

It is 38.6% more likely that puppies will wander into the street in front of a quiet car.

If it is a Tesla car they could get wedged under the car where they will burst into flames from leaky batteries.

It is obvious that 60mins was playing this car noise to warn the puppies to get off the road while they were filming for the report.

Re:All cars should be required to make a Vrrumm so (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 6 months ago | (#46649529)

Why don't they just add a beep ... beep... sound like a commercial vehicle makes when reversing.?..

And (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649523)

I bet it is the same editor who adds engine sounds to spaceships flying in empty space!

Two can play that game. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649535)

Time for Tesla to run some footage of Morely Safer with a few sound effects added. Is that an audio editing error I smell?

Slashdot editors suck Musk cock. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649547)

And the sound of them slurping cum doesn't need to be overdubbed,
because they ARE SLURPING MUSK CUM.

Journalistic Integrity (1)

rjmarvin (3001897) | about 6 months ago | (#46649567)

I'm sure this wasn't just one low-level sound editor's fault...but that guy will be working at McDonalds by the end of the week.

Watch 60 Minutes? (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 6 months ago | (#46649625)

This is Slashdot - do you mean you pirated the torrent or something?

60 minutes is not longer of value (4, Insightful)

cfulton (543949) | about 6 months ago | (#46649735)

They have lost all credibility in the last year. They are no longer a news outlet but the paid shills of their network an their sponsors.

Are these the same editors who.. (1)

Anonymous Meoward (665631) | about 6 months ago | (#46649737)

..added the propeller noises to the jet in "Airplane!" ?

Ahhh, "an error was made..." (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#46649745)

Gotta love the way those crusading journalists, champions of the truth, arbiters of reality and honesty cover their butts when they get caught willfully misleading people. It's like the politician/bureaucrat who says "mistakes were made" (as though the error created itself) rather than "I screwed up"... The TV news version of this is "it was an editing error" (as though there was no reporter and no editor and no producer... the equipment in the editing bay just switched itself on and edited the program and dubbed-out important facts, or dubbed-in completely fake audio, etc)

Remember when NBC edited the 9-11 tape in the Trayvon Martin case? They edited-out the dispatcher asking George Zimmerman to identify the race of the person he thought was acting suspiciously so that it sounded like Zimmerman was fixated on race (this fit nicely with the theme the corporation was championing on its MSNBC network - pure coincidence I'm sure). When caught, the network said it was an editing error.

It's standard group-think on left-wing web sites to obey DNC talking points and always refer to Fox News as "Faux News" and pretend that Fox is the one network that cannot be trusted, but while this tactic may be politically useful to Democrats trying to marginalize the only network that's not in-the-tank for Obama and the DNC, the truth is that examples like these illustrate that ALL news outlets need to be scrutinized and every one of them needs to be ridiculed when it is caught intentionally manipulating the news. When a channel is caught with an intentional fabrication like this and it does not come clean and admit the details, then it needs to be publicly criticized. This was NOT some news reader getting tounge-tied and mis-pronouncing a name (THAT is a "mistake") or ad-libbing and mis-identifying a location depicted in a live video feed (THAT is a "mistake"). This was a deliberate act to add a sound that was not present on the raw footage... and the way it was handled tells you that doctoring video in this way is apparently not noteworthy in that facility.

Electric cars and downshifting (4, Interesting)

Andy Dodd (701) | about 6 months ago | (#46649793)

Actually there are valid reasons for an electric vehicle to shift gears - just because many electric vehicles only have one gear doesn't mean there aren't valid reasons for having multiple gear ratios.

Although in the case of EVs, shifting tends to be more speed-dependent than load-dependent. While EV motors are typically constant-power, there ARE torque limits at low speeds due to current limits. Although this usually means that an EV that has more than one gear ratio needs far fewer than an internal combustion vehicle. (as in, even two gear ratios is usually enough in the rare cases where only one gear ratio wasn't.)

See Charles Guan's burnoutchibi project as one example.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?