Weird indeed. Blank buttons in base model vehicles are at least user-accessible as opposed to a camera module behind glass. Any time I add an accessory, the button fascia gets popped out and a rocker switch put in. Perhaps the dummy camera is the same form factor of a component that Tesla knows it will include in future releases and is just carving out room for a possible upgrade years from now?
A car grille is a much more prominent and expected visual feature of a car, though. This small, tucked away yet realistic-looking camera doesn't seem to fit the same reasoning for me. That said, it wouldn't be entirely surprising if some designer "couldn't stop noticing it missing" or something along those lines.
> In truth, most American cars had been "bottom breathers"--they got their air from below the bumper and beneath the car, rather than from air rushing through the grille and radiator--for years. For the Taurus, Ford stylists merely took the bottom-breather reality to heart, made it work for them, and blocked the nose of their volume-selling sedan. The overall effect instantly made the rest of Detroit's output look old-fashioned in the process.
My guess would be so that eagle-eyed ocd tesla owners don’t freak out over seeming to have fewer cameras in their car than their buddy’s previous model year version.
I’m certain there’s be posts complaining about being short a camera without any understanding of hw4 being better despite having a smaller quantity of cameras.
It's still incredibly bizarre to go through the effort of manufacturing a real-looking fake camera instead of using an industry-standard feature-delete panel like the entire rest of the automotive industry.
The fake camera feels like it's trying to mislead people.
It could be but misleading has a few levels. One is misleading that it has a feature that it doesn't (like 100 HP vs 500 HP) and the other is putting something there that a person expects even though it's no longer necessary (like the close door button in an eleveator)
I think it's clearly misleading in-that it is pretending to have an expensive camera but does not.
No brand-new first-time Tesla owner is going to freak out because there's a feature-delete panel somewhere in the vehicle. There's probably others already after-all, they are very standard in most vehicles.
So... who is this for?
If it looked so terrible to remove one camera, then redesign that component to look good again. After all, it's not like they're going back to the old design.
This would be more akin to your brand new laptop having a fake ethernet port... why?
Those are for a different purpose. Many car aficionados have historically changed their exhaust system to achieve better performance. The fake exhaust pipes are to make the car appear performant and powerful.
In many cases, cars are sold by tickling the interest of people who want performance.
Tesla's Model S Page: "With a drag coefficient of just .208
Cd, the lowest on the planet, Model S is built for speed,
endurance and range. Improved aerodynamics and a wider
chassis offer more responsive performance so you can take
corners quicker and with more confidence." [1]
That's even the case with the Telsa Model X.
Tesla's Model X Page: "With the most power and quickest
acceleration of any SUV, Model X Plaid is the highest
performing SUV ever built." [2]
And, for people who want their Tesla to have an exhaust for barreling down the road, there are 3rd party add-ons for that!
Did you crave the performance of a Tesla electric car but
miss the sound of a rumbling V8? A UK exhaust manufacturer
may have the answer: fake external noise. [3] Youtube of
the sounds from that fake exhaust.[4]
I guess there are some people, though, who see a camera and think of a performance built vehicle.
The article says they did it because the camera needs to be on one side or the other depending on the drive side of the country. This must have been easier than building two different enclosures.