Thoughts on TESLA

[misanman]

Not sure if I mentioned this before but DS works for one of the major automotive companies (Tesla competitors, obviously) and was involved with some Tesla tear down work. His comment was that their engineers would be fired for producing a car with the number of issues they found with the Tesla. Could be sour grapes coming from a competitor but seems to be confirmed by the Munro report.

 

[Texas Proud]

Not sure if I mentioned this before but DS works for one of the major automotive companies (Tesla competitors, obviously) and was involved with some Tesla tear down work. His comment was that their engineers would be fired for producing a car with the number of issues they found with the Tesla. Could be sour grapes coming from a competitor but seems to be confirmed by the Munro report.

Probably not sour grapes...


One thing that I would be worried about IF I were a Tesla owner is will this crappy engineering create problems down the road? IOW, will the 9 piece whatever start to squeak and rattle as opposed to a single stamped on that does not...


Only time will tell... but I think that the number sold will mean that CR will not list them in their annual survey....

 

[Fedup]

I don't think having the production facility in San Francisco bay area, with HCOL and being in CA with a lot of extra company costs (read that as regulation, taxes, fees, etc) is going to help with lowering production costs on the cars. There is a reason that the rest of the automotive manufacturing has left CA, it is just not cost effective compared to other locations.

They used the old GM/Toyota plant, so there’s that available workforce there already. Not everybody there gets paid high salary.

 

[Mr. Tightwad]

Right. The Model 3 with reduced range sells for $45K, but Tesla tells us that it costs $35K after federal and state rebates. But, it is really only $31K, Elon says, after the gasoline savings.

Wow. So my present car was free, because I've driven 100K miles, and fuel savings (compared to driving an M-1 tank) are greater than what I paid the car.

This is like DW with the dang Kohl's coupons.

Also--does it look to anybody else like these Model 3's are driving around with the protective stretch-wrap still stuck over the nose? Wrapped up like Auntie's sofa.

\

Now thats one good looking vehicle. Mine's black. That owner paid more to get silver.

 

[bobandsherry]

Musk, inspiring and motivating leader.... If you enjoy micromanagement and having advice ignored.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/19/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-extreme-micro-manager.html

 

[ls99]

As one of the engineers have been busy pointing out electric cars such as Tesla are not necessarily the environmentally clean gizmos. The ones using Lithium batteries for example.

An article in:

https://www.industryweek.com/techno...cret-manufacturing-them-leaves-massive-carbon

explains, "Once in operation, electric cars certainly reduce your carbon footprint, but making the lithium-ion batteries could emit 74% more CO2 than for conventional cars."

"
For perspective, the average German car owner could drive a gas-guzzling vehicle for three and a half years, or more than 50,000 kilometers, before a Nissan Leaf with a 30 kWh battery would beat it on carbon-dioxide emissions in a coal-heavy country, Berylls estimates show.
And that's one of the smallest batteries on the market: BMW's i3 has a 42 kWh battery, Mercedes's upcoming EQC crossover will have a 80 kWh battery, and Audi's e-tron will come in at 95 kWh."

 

[ncbill]

As one of the engineers have been busy pointing out electric cars such as Tesla are not necessarily the environmentally clean gizmos. The ones using Lithium batteries for example.

An article in:

https://www.industryweek.com/techno...cret-manufacturing-them-leaves-massive-carbon

explains, "Once in operation, electric cars certainly reduce your carbon footprint, but making the lithium-ion batteries could emit 74% more CO2 than for conventional cars."

"
For perspective, the average German car owner could drive a gas-guzzling vehicle for three and a half years, or more than 50,000 kilometers, before a Nissan Leaf with a 30 kWh battery would beat it on carbon-dioxide emissions in a coal-heavy country, Berylls estimates show.
And that's one of the smallest batteries on the market: BMW's i3 has a 42 kWh battery, Mercedes's upcoming EQC crossover will have a 80 kWh battery, and Audi's e-tron will come in at 95 kWh."

Another example of cherry-picking by assuming battery packs are built where power plants are nearly all fueled by coal.

That's certainly not the case here in the U.S. with the "Gigafactory."

And if you're concerned with pollutants, e.g. NOx, those remain easier to regulate at thousands of power plants vs. millions of tailpipes.

 

[ERD50]

Will this "smaller" battery actually have fewer cells, or will it be another hoax like they offered with the "S", where it was same battery just software controlled if it was the larger or smaller range battery? ...

Why label this as a hoax? The customer gets the range they pay for, what's the issue? Why should the customer care if it is done by a software setting that limits the discharge, or with fewer cells?

The customer has some pros/cons for each. A larger pack with tighter discharge limits will extend the life of the pack. Customer may have the option of purchasing (enabling) the higher range if they want. IIRC, Tesla extended the discharge limit (over-the-air update) for a limited time for people in the hurricane zone, and a bigger pack would have added unused margin. The capability might increase resale value. The only negative I can think of is you are carrying extra weight you are not using.

It appears that in this case, it is a smaller pack (as I'd expect, due to the impact of cost at this lower price point), But Tesla has 2 reasons I can think of for using the larger pack and a software limit:

1) I makes manufacturing and inventory simpler. Relative to the cost of the cells, this does not seem like a strong reason to me.

2) If their marketing indicates a large enough % upgrade to the extended range later, it might pay for itself.

....

It was reported that the full-blown "self-driving" option was quietly dropped. The autopilot is still there, but the promise that it would be upgraded in the future is no longer offered.

Yep. Fully autonomous car is a lot harder than Musk thought....

PS. Musk had said that other car makers use lidar as a crutch, and he intended to do without it. Yeah, but without lidar, Tesla car is like on a wheelchair, i.e. not really walking.

I wonder how much this is going to hurt gross margins? I'm reading it was a [-]$3,000~$5,000[/-] ( see below, looks like a $5,000 to $8,000 cost, the $5K is prerequisite for the $3Koption), and if I understand gross margin calculations, that would seem to be near 100% profit,for the $3,000 in software, right (the costs are 'overhead' for software engineers - no 'direct' costs?)? While it looks like the $5,000 involves hardware and direct costs, but typically options have a higher gross margin.

Just found more info (from October 11th 2017), the % uptake was higher than I thought - this is lots of lost revenue for Tesla:

https://futurism.com/35000-people-bought-teslas-fully-self-driving-features-but-they-dont-exist-yet

According to data uncovered by Electrek via an anonymous source, some 77 percent of owners bought the Enhanced Autopilot package, while around 40 percent opted for the Fully Self-Driving Capability.

The latter functionality costs $3,000 in addition to the base cost of the vehicle, and the purchase of the $5,000 Enhanced Autopilot option is a prerequisite. It’s rather impressive that Tesla has managed to get more than 35,000 people to pony up that $8,000 sum, given that the software update still has no set release date.

....

And if you're concerned with pollutants, e.g. NOx, those remain easier to regulate at thousands of power plants vs. millions of tailpipes.

Please provide some source data that indicates NOx levels for the fossil fuel plants on the grid in the US have dropped faster than NOx levels for cars. Cars have dropped 97.7% since 1975.

The development and chronology of autmobile emissions reductions efforts in the United States

And don't forget that inconvenient truth - added demand from EVs will be supplied almost totally from fossil fuel plants for the foreseeable future, there is no steady excess of RE available to charge those EVs. So reduction of NOx at those fossil fuel plants (and/or shift to Nukes) is what is relevant.

-ERD50

 

[ls99]

Another example of cherry-picking by assuming battery packs are built where power plants are nearly all fueled by coal.

That's certainly not the case here in the U.S. with the "Gigafactory."

And if you're concerned with pollutants, e.g. NOx, those remain easier to regulate at thousands of power plants vs. millions of tailpipes.

Hmmm. Much hype was created about the gigafactory getting covered by solar panels. A recent aerial view of the plant is somehow different.

An article on the subject:https://dailykanban.com/2017/10/tesla-gigafactory-solar-power-scrapped-insider-claims/



"The pictures of a Gigafactory decked-out in solar panels are still on Tesla’s website, but recent drone footage of the Gigafactory shows the battery plant devoid of any topside solar panels. There may never be any solar panels, a Gigafactory insider claims."
"
A filing with the SEC shows that as part of Nevada’s Thank You to Tesla for coming to the state, the company’s power bill will be substantially discounted.

According to the filing, which had parts redacted after Tesla requested “confidential treatment,” Tesla “shall be eligible for a discount to the base tariff energy rate portion of its electric power bill equal to: thirty percent in the first and second years of the contract, twenty percent in the third, fourth, fifth and sixth years of the contract, and ten percent in the seventh and eighth years of the contract.” "


Thus another splendid theory destroyed by ugly facts.
I'll pass on discussing cherry picking.

Add/Edit some more.

From the same article: And there is waste
"“Just a 3 second power failure, which happens there 2-3 times per week is an extremely major production killer to Panasonic who makes the battery cells inside the Gigafactory. The time it takes to get the equipment back up and running after even the slightest power bump is on average 6 hours. All battery cells produced for about 3-4 hours prior to the power bump also become worthless and must be disposed of. Millions of batteries end up unusable in the trash from just a 3 second power bump.” "

What is the cost of recycling of worthless battery cells?

Edit sdd
One more Sept 2018 view of the massive solar panel installation on top of the gigafactory NOT. From a different perspective: https://electrek.co/2018/09/20/tesla-gigafactory-1-new-drone-flyover-solar-array/
​

 

[beowulf]

OK, I'm convinced. No Tesla for me. For the current $55K or more for a Model 3, I'd rather have a midsized SUV with a 400 mile range with a gas tank that can be filled in 3 minutes. Maybe when there are a lot of EV manufacturers which will lower prices, gas becomes very expensive, there are fast charge stations in every gas station and EVs can get maintenance pretty much everywhere in the US, I'll consider one. Also, I tend to keep cars for 14 or 15 tears, sometimes longer. I don't see the current selection of EVs lasting that long with out extremely high maintenance costs - as in $8 to $10K for a battery pack.

 

[NW-Bound]

Regarding future update of the autopilot to "full self driving" no longer being offered:

I wonder how much this is going to hurt gross margins? I'm reading it was a [-]$3,000~$5,000[/-] ( see below, looks like a $5,000 to $8,000 cost, the $5K is prerequisite for the $3K option), and if I understand gross margin calculations, that would seem to be near 100% profit,for the $3,000 in software, right (the costs are 'overhead' for software engineers - no 'direct' costs?)? While it looks like the $5,000 involves hardware and direct costs, but typically options have a higher gross margin.

Losing $3K from 40% of purchases surely hurts. But that may be better than having to reimburse them later, or facing more lawsuits on the vaporware.

Tesla already settled a lawsuit on the Models S and X, alleging that the company’s assisted-driving Autopilot system was “essentially unusable and demonstrably dangerous.”

However, Tesla got away easy by paying each customer between $20 and $280 in compensation. The original cost of this option: $5000.

Maybe Tesla does not think it can get away that easy this time, when it is spelled out in the company Web site that the ultimate autopilot can drive the car 100% hand-free, from a home garage to a chosen destination. I saw a company's video showing exactly that. Have not looked to see if the video is still there.

See: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...over-dangerous-autopilot-system-idUSKCN1IQ1SH

 

[Mr. Tightwad]

I paid 49k for my Model 3, -10,450 rebate/credit, 38,550 cost to me, and charge at home whenever I feel like it.

 

[NW-Bound]

Due to careless editing, my post #1236 had an error where I put words in ERD50's mouth. Unfortunately, the edit time window ran out, and I cannot fix my mistake.

The above post should read as follows.




Regarding future update of the autopilot to "full self driving" no longer being offered:

...
I wonder how much this is going to hurt gross margins? I'm reading it was a [-]$3,000~$5,000[/-] ( see below, looks like a $5,000 to $8,000 cost, the $5K is prerequisite for the $3Koption), and if I understand gross margin calculations, that would seem to be near 100% profit,for the $3,000 in software, right (the costs are 'overhead' for software engineers - no 'direct' costs?)? While it looks like the $5,000 involves hardware and direct costs, but typically options have a higher gross margin.

Just found more info (from October 11th 2017), the % uptake was higher than I thought - this is lots of lost revenue for Tesla:

https://futurism.com/35000-people-bought-teslas-fully-self-driving-features-but-they-dont-exist-yet
...
-ERD50

Losing $3K from 40% of purchases surely hurts. But that may be better than having to reimburse them later, or facing more lawsuits on the vaporware.

Tesla already settled a lawsuit on the Models S and X which alleged that the company’s assisted-driving Autopilot system was “essentially unusable and demonstrably dangerous.”

However, Tesla got away easy by paying each customer between $20 and $280 in compensation. The original cost of this option: $5000.

Maybe Tesla does not think it can get away that easy this time, when it was spelled out on the company Web site that the ultimate autopilot could drive the car 100% hand-free, from a home garage to a chosen destination, and that the release was pending government approval. I saw a company's video showing exactly this future wonderful capability. Very impressive! Have not looked to see if the video is still there.

See: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...over-dangerous-autopilot-system-idUSKCN1IQ1SH


PS. Just recently, when a Tesla 3 owner complained about the center console displaying the car speed not being in front of the driver, and requiring eye diversion from the road in front, Musk said that when the autopilot got fully enabled, who would care or need to look at any display. Hah!

PPS. When asked about the full autonomous driving future update option being taken away, Musk said because it caused "too much confusion". Confusion? As in expecting to actually get it at some point?

 

[ERD50]

I paid 49k for my Model 3, -10,450 rebate/credit, 38,550 cost to me, and charge at home whenever I feel like it.

How much did the charger/installation cost?

Not saying you are a fanbois, but that's something that fanbois seem to gloss over.


-ERD50

 

[ERD50]

Due to careless editing, my post #1236 had an error where I put words in ERD50's mouth. ...

Hah, I was out all day, and I was just catching up and thinking "did I say that?"

-ERD50

 

[Lakewood90712]

I don't think having the production facility in San Francisco bay area, with HCOL and being in CA with a lot of extra company costs (read that as regulation, taxes, fees, etc) is going to help with lowering production costs on the cars. There is a reason that the rest of the automotive manufacturing has left CA, it is just not cost effective compared to other locations.

2 reasons the Tesla production line is in the coastal area of California.

1, The small reason: 128 million in state tax incentives. https://insideevs.com/tesla-gets-39...ornia-still-costly-operate-despite-tax-break/

2. The bigger reason. The Tesla plant in Fremont is an hour plane ride from Elon's front yard. No way is this guy going to have his baby further away. SpaceX is about an hour by car (20 miles) from his homestead too.

SpaceX is walking distance from a regional airport . He can easily be at both plants every day.

 

[Fedup]

2 reasons the Tesla production line is in the coastal area of California.

1, The small reason: 128 million in state tax incentives. https://insideevs.com/tesla-gets-39...ornia-still-costly-operate-despite-tax-break/

2. The bigger reason. The Tesla plant in Fremont is an hour plane ride from Elon's front yard. No way is this guy going to have his baby further away. SpaceX is about an hour by car (20 miles) from his homestead too.

SpaceX is walking distance from a regional airport . He can easily be at both plants every day.

I believe he got the plant in Fremont for cheap, not so much it’s an hour from his house, not the main reason.

 

[Totoro]

How much did the charger/installation cost?

Anecdote isn't data of course, my brothers charger installation cost him 250 EUR for a Tesla Model S. Don't know the capacity, but he could fully charge it overnight.

Further quotes I heard here cost around 400 for a 3.7KW installation or 800 for 7.4KW and up. Basically, as long as you don't have to dig you're good.

I got a quote from an incumbent big name here, they asked for 3k upwards that included breaking up the street and upgrading the box.

 

[kcowan]

Why label this as a hoax? The customer gets the range they pay for, what's the issue? Why should the customer care if it is done by a software setting that limits the discharge, or with fewer cells?

In the olden days of unit record equipment, when you ordered an upgrade, the tech would come and install the appropriate pulley. Of course, the equipment was rented.

 

[ERD50]

Anecdote isn't data of course, my brothers charger installation cost him 250 EUR for a Tesla Model S. Don't know the capacity, but he could fully charge it overnight.

Further quotes I heard here cost around 400 for a 3.7KW installation or 800 for 7.4KW and up. Basically, as long as you don't have to dig you're good.

I got a quote from an incumbent big name here, they asked for 3k upwards that included breaking up the street and upgrading the box.

A Level 2 charger is needed for a full charge overnight, and is going to need a 40 AMP circuit in the US (these are dedicated circuits). For almost everyone in the US, that means hiring an electrician to install that circuit, and in many cases, an upgrade to the box.

Costs for that will vary by specifics, like distance to the main box. But it isn't insignificant for many.

OK, found this:

https://www.realtor.com/advice/home-improvement/installing-electric-vehicle-charger/

A Level 2 charger will cost a bit more: The station will cost roughly $500 to $700, and the parts and labor will likely cost $1,200 to $2,000. The installation process could cost more if your main point of charging will require major electrical upgrades.

...

Another cost to consider is permitting: Certain states require homeowners to get a permit when installing charging stations. In some places, you can get a $50 over-the-counter permit, while others will require as much as $200 and plans drawn by an engineer.

I don't think you can get the street dug up (and repaired?) and a box put in for anywhere near $3K in the US.

-ERD50

 

[indiajust]

Imagine if Toyota purchased Tesla. If there was some lucky combination of Toyota engineering and factory DFM, Tesla technology, Tesla styling. A true low cost, high value, decent profit, high volume, scalable electric vehicle. Something like when Pinin Farina and VW combined efforts.
Or even more outrageous, what if Tesla open sourced its tech to all? Become a Tier One auto supplier like GKN? Sell the factory?

 

[samclem]

Imagine if Toyota purchased Tesla. If there was some lucky combination of Toyota engineering and factory DFM, Tesla technology, Tesla styling. A true low cost, high value, decent profit, high volume, scalable electric vehicle. Something like when Pinin Farina and VW combined efforts.
Or even more outrageous, what if Tesla open sourced its tech to all? Become a Tier One auto supplier like GKN? Sell the factory?

I see your point, but I am quite sure Toyota would not want to own the management of Tesla nor would they want to purchase the results of the decisions made by that team (production facilities, product engineering, etc). I'm also pretty sure Tesla would not be seen by Toyota as a reliable supplier of parts/components. Toyota might be interested in the technology itself, but there's no good reason they should pay Tesla a premium for it. If/when Tesla collapses, Toyota (and Honda, maybe Chevy) will be there to pick up the pieces. By then, we'll know if there's any real mass demand for these cars, or if they'll remain a niche product that can only be sustained with a constant infusion of government money (and that of speculative investors).

 

[Cessna152]

Or even more outrageous, what if Tesla open sourced its tech to all?

Not sure if that was a rhetorical or genuine question, but in either case for those who are unaware, Tesla “open-sourced” its patents back in 2013 and some companies eventually began using them:
https://electrek.co/2015/11/10/a-number-of-companies-are-now-using-teslas-open-source-patents-and-it-has-some-interesting-implications/

Likewise, it has or intends to open-source some of its software:
https://electrek.co/2018/08/11/tesla-open-source-vehicle-security-software-free-other-automakers-safe-self-driving-future/

 

[NW-Bound]

Wow, if a business is so altruistic, how can it survive?

I read the material in the above links, and it says that if a company uses Tesla's patents, then reciprocally, Tesla will also be able to use that company's patents.

I guess whether that is fair or not depends on who has more patents or important ones to trade. I can see companies smaller than Tesla would be able to take advantage of this, while larger companies with a big patent portfolio would be reluctant.

 

[indiajust]

Thanks for the info on the patent sharing. In an age of patent trolls, this has become the common way to defend and monetize patents. I just did not know that Tesla had already done so. Not altruism, mutual cooperative advantage.

There are plenty of good arguments for ditching the entire patent system, but in the mean time, group sharing like this is great way to turn patents into products and into money. Which is the point.

Thanks for the link.