The Tesla Thread

[adam cool dude]

I am failing to see how that is comparable to what I posted?

I was talking about specific Model 3 production at that moment in time. How does that compare to all the cars Volvo made in a month?

I was comparing against all Tesla production which is around 34,000 units year to date not just Model 3.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

Lets be realistic the incumbent big manufactures shouldn't be wholly fearful of Tesla, they are a threat but compared to the Chinese players currently producing more than anyone else. The Chinese players are really starting to ramp up and are starting to look at Europe for a potential expansion.

I get that that Chinese cars are generally not up to the standard of European cars but the majority of consumers are really price sensitive at the moment, just look how many Dacia's are on the roads now. They are hateful cars, but they are dirt cheap and everywhere. Imagine is BYD came to the UK, its not just cars its bus' and lorries too.

The city of Shenhzen in China (population 12.53 million) has changed every bus to electric, that's over 16,000 buses or 279,000 barrels A DAY of fuel not being burnt in the city. That's insane.

London has 170 which frankly is a poor effort, so much for trying to improve air quality in the city.

 

[Amp34]

nope, but again 150gwh of that is just teslas that's almost a third of the capcity on its own. Lets assume all go to evs (which it doesn't, all though it will be a significant amount, it all depends how much grid power swallows up as well). Then Tesla is still going to be a massive player in 2025(ignoring any other gigafactorys they build). Then on top of that as I said earlier is the cell cost, which when you get someone else to build it, and spread out in smaller factories, is almost certainly going to cost more. Even if that battery production was split just between 2 other car manufactures they would only just be able to produce slightly more than tesla each(and likely far less due to future gigafactories).

now can you see why battery manufacturing is so important, and why the numbers dont add up. all these cars they say they going to build yet, tesla owns a huge chunk of the cell market, even taking into account future plants.

You missed the bit where I said those figures don’t include Tesla’s expanded factory or any other Gigafactories they plan on building. The majority of that capacity is coming from a China.

 

[Glaucus]

You missed the bit where I said those figures don’t include Tesla’s expanded factory or any other Gigafactories they plan on building. The majority of that capacity is coming from a China.

Doesn't change what I said though, that's still a quarter of production. So it still means that Tesla isn't going to be small fry and that others can just start out producing them because they have existing car factories.
And as above how much of those Chinese factories are going to sell to traditional car companies, when chinas policy is massive RV and grid battery.

 

[Angilion]

Battery swapping is a dead concept for cars, 95% of charging is done at home or when the car is idle (work, shopping, eating etc) so the actual need for rapid charging for most people would be rare unlike when people get fuel now. Imagine how many filling stations there would be if you had your own at home, hardly any.

The sort of infrastructure that would be needed to support it would be huge and you still need all the rapid chargers to charge the batteries that get taken out of cars, it just wouldn't be financially viable compared to just sticking in the chargers and making people wait for 30 mins rather than 5-10 for a swap.

As you say there would be a need for standard removable batteries which almost certainly mean they will be smaller which will reduce range (same reason why almost all phone and laptop batteries are now shaped to the chassis and non removeable). It also means that basically every car chassis would need to essentially be standardised. Neither is going to happen.

A good argument, but I think there might be a place for it. Many people in this country don't have a garage, so they won't have a place to charge an EV at home. It may well be that 95% of charging is done at home now, but that can't be the case if EVs become mainstream. Not in the UK, anyway. Charging points every few metres on every street would also require huge infrastructure to support it. There's no getting away from the need for huge infrastructure of one kind or another - we'd also need to increase generating capacity and national grid capability. It's all doable, but there's a lot of infrastructure requirements regardless of the method used. A multitude of charging stations capable of supplying 100+KW to numerous cars simultaneously would also be a huge infrastructure requirement and that would be needed to handle millions of EVs on the roads (as far as I know there are about 30 million vehicles in the UK) you'd need at least 100KW to charge an EV in 30 minutes.

 

[Angilion]

just lol. except i don't believe anything that you just said.

Your beliefs do not determine what is true.

even going by your figures its not 40% reduction, 8ton battery is not 40% reduction of a 36ton truck, thats before you take into account the significant amount of weight you are taking out, ie engine, transmission and fuel.

A 36 tonne truck does not have a 36 tonne carrying capacity. A 36 tonne truck itself is very heavy even with the engine, etc, removed.

8 tonnes of batteries is assuming the rather implausible idea that the truck is only ever used on absolutely flat roads and never goes uphill, not even a gradient of a couple of percent.

In that best case (and extremely unrealistic) scenario the extra reduction in payload of 8 tonnes of batteries would "only" be ~28%. Which is more than the claimed potential reduction in running costs (20%), so the Tesla truck would cost trucking companies more to run even in that very unrealistic best case scenario even if it was the same price as an ICE truck. Which, of course, it isn't. The batteries alone would cost more than an ICE truck.

Here's a handy page to look at the factors involved:

https://battery.real.engineering/

 

[Glaucus]

I'm well aware it doesn't have a 36ton capicty,but your maths doesnt work. Even with the 8tons it's not a 40% reduction. Especially as the engine itself is typically 4.5 tons which is totally removed, then fuel and reduction in transmission weight as well.

 

[b0rn2sk8]

A good argument, but I think there might be a place for it. Many people in this country don't have a garage, so they won't have a place to charge an EV at home. It may well be that 95% of charging is done at home now, but that can't be the case if EVs become mainstream. Not in the UK, anyway. Charging points every few metres on every street would also require huge infrastructure to support it. There's no getting away from the need for huge infrastructure of one kind or another - we'd also need to increase generating capacity and national grid capability. It's all doable, but there's a lot of infrastructure requirements regardless of the method used. A multitude of charging stations capable of supplying 100+KW to numerous cars simultaneously would also be a huge infrastructure requirement and that would be needed to handle millions of EVs on the roads (as far as I know there are about 30 million vehicles in the UK) you'd need at least 100KW to charge an EV in 30 minutes.

I think you are overestimating the need for 100kw chargers, most people could get away with charging their car on a 13A plug. The average car in the UK moves less than 24 miles a day, that could be recouped from a 13A socket in 2-3 hours. There are lots of other places that cars spend a lot of time that just isn't at home and putting in a bunch of 3.6kw or 7.2kw chargers is a cheap and realistic option. Places like work, public carparks, train stations, shopping centres etc. as well as in residential streets. Chargers can also be installed into existing street furniture like lamp posts, there isn't always a need to put in a dedicated post. Combine that with a smaller number of rapid chargers and everyone will be covered. Those that tend to live in cities and apartment blocks normally work locally anyway so the need for a daily charge is mitigated somewhat.

Lots of electrical outlets in public carparks is really common in counties with a cold climate (eg. Scandinavia) for plugging in engine block heaters so it can be done.

The national grid has also said that EV's are actually helping stabilise the grid because it smooths out the demand, we will certainly see 'off peak' energy prices rise as a result but there is still a lot of capacity that is untapped overnight.

 

[Mr Jack]

Charging from home is easy if you have dedicated parking, not so much on the UK's overcrowded terraced streets. Parking within 50 feet of my house could not be relied on. Street based charging architecture that is moderately resistant to casual vabdalism and interference will be required for large areas of UK cities.

 

[Mr Jack]

A 36 tonne truck does not have a 36 tonne carrying capacity. A 36 tonne truck itself is very heavy even with the engine, etc, removed.

I'm not hugely knowledgeable about the area, but isn't it usual for lorries to run considerably below their weight limit anyway because the capacity is limited by volume not weight for most goods?

 

[Supernova]

the iPace is a crossover and the X is a full sized SUV.

The X is not an SUV, at all. It’s ground clearance is not high enough to technically be an SUV. It’s a car with an enormous upper body.

i-Pace has the ground clearance to be an SUV.

Once again it’s Tesla telling porkies about what their cars are or what they are capable of.

 

[VincentHanna]

Total BS

From Wikipedia:

There is no universally accepted definition of the sport utility vehicle.[11] Dictionaries, automotive experts, and journalists use varying wordings and defining characteristics, in addition to which there are regional variations of the use by both the media and the general public. Also the auto industry has not settled on one definition of the SUV.[11]

 

[Mr Jack]

Total BS

From Wikipedia:

And yet the same article includes features such as ground clearance in its description of what an SUV is.

 

[Jonnycoupe]

I can tell you the many ways to meet USA SUV criteria... unfortunately it’s not on Wikipedia.

Start with a 14degree breakover angle for a start.

Doesn’t really matter when someone counters your sentence on a forum though.

 

[chroniclard]

Does it matter.

I wish there was a Tesla rival. Something 30-40k, family sized with decent performance. All the current alternatives are crud, hybrids and/or low range.

 

[VincentHanna]

Well the maximum ground clearance using air suspension on the model X is 8.7 inches

Which is more than a Landrover Discovery Sport, BMW X3 and Porsche Cayenne.

I take it they aren't SUVs either? Even though the BMW site says this for instance:

A tough competitor in the SUV class, the BMW X3 features a whole new redesign exuding maturity and elegance. Thanks to semi-autonomous driving systems and the intelligent all-wheel drive system BMW xDrive, you’re promised an exceptional experience.

 

[Amp34]

The X is not an SUV, at all. It’s ground clearance is not high enough to technically be an SUV. It’s a car with an enormous upper body.

i-Pace has the ground clearance to be an SUV.

Once again it’s Tesla telling porkies about what their cars are or what they are capable of.

I thought this too, but then looked it up.

The X (and tbh some/all S) has air suspension that can raise it up to around 8”, a lot more than the iPace.

The line between SUV and crossover is so blurred now that they’re basically both the same.

Some vehicles look more like more traditional SUVs than others (such as the iPace vs the X), but to really consider one more off road viable you need to be looking at AWD Vs true 4WD and things like low range and locking diffs. Not that those definitions may actually be that relevant in many EVs, with no traditional gearbox and motors on each wheel.

That said, the iPace looks much nicer to me. The X looks more like an MPV.

Edit: and the X3? That’s a “crossover” and competes in the same space as the CRV and RAV4, both also “crossovers”. The Disco Sport is the new Freelander, which was arguably the first “Crossover”, no low range and designed for mostly on road use.

 

[Phate]

Back to actual Model 3 news - I read today on Teslarati that Tesla have been able to decrease the battery build time from 7hrs to 17 minutes...anyone else find that a mindblowing improvement? or am I just easily amused

Reports coming from them are still indicating 5-6k units by the end of June. They're planning a further production shutdown toward the end of May for machine upgrades to achieve this. Happy times

I wonder how far they'll push it? Is 5-6k units a week enough or do they want more?

 

[Glaucus]

Iirc they want 500k a year production eventually.
Fluff bot was sacked. Did find that funny on the earnings call.

 

[Phate]

Iirc they want 500k a year production eventually.
Fluff bot was sacked. Did find that funny on the earnings call.

Yeah I giggled when I read about "fluff bot"

500k units a year is just under 10k units a week. Oddly for me I actually don't mind the wait. Ironing out the kinks. Portugal only has a few Superchargers up and running so far with 12 planned for the end of the year, then I believe they'll double it again next year. So the longer I wait the better it will be to own one.

Did laugh with the wife about it this weekend. Her concern was visiting her grandfather who lives at the very edge of the Model 3s range limit and was concerned about the delays it would cause to stop and charge on an already long 4ish hour journey, its also the furthest we ever drive. I checke and they're planning a Supercharger station less than 5 minutes away from his house - the only real "issue" is her parents. Can get there, but no local charging available. So we'll be fitting a wallbox.