Ford paid $199,950 to tear down a Tesla Model X
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
Is this really a story? Or just clickbait because it has Tesla in the title?
I wonder if there's some reason they specifically went for one of the earliest ones sold. Maybe as one of the first ones made, it would be more in "prototype" mode versus one of the latest versions.
What makes it interesting is to see how the car industry reacts to Tesla's disrupting the industry, which in this case is one reaction (of many). Thats what I think is fascinating.
Long waiting lists aren't the norm for most cars. I have very little doubt that Ford routinely does timely teardowns of major vehicles that it competes with.
They do the same with all their competitors. (Yes even hondas)
Get one early, measure tolerances, get one 6 months later, see if their manufacturing practices got better.
Appropriately enough Honda acquired something like 20 Porsche 911s when developing the S2000, all individual purchases to hide the fact.
Cessna routinely did the same with competitors aircraft, back when they actually developed aircraft, but to save money they only leased them and had to ensure they were put back together.
Edit: finished the anecdote about Cessna
I worked in an advanced vehicle design skunkworks at GM Design Staff in the late 1980's (a time when the quality of Japanese cars was a top threat to US car makers). While there I had access to a wide range of top of the line Japanese-domestic-market-only vehicles imported into the US specifically for teardowns just like this, frequently before Japanese buyers could obtain them locally domestically. In those days, it wasn't electric power plants that were the issue, it was (among other things) the density and efficiency and downright beauty with which the engine compartment contents were packed. I still remember standing around an open engine with a bunch of hotshot car guys, all of us in awe at the look of the engine compartment in front of us. There was nothing on the US market packed anywhere near as tightly, yet everything was completely accessible and downright beautiful. In hindsight I strongly suspect this was a sign they started using CAD packing tools long before we did (laser scanning of hand-sculpted car designs was still a few years away in the US, to say nothing of actual CAD-first designs). If the packing was done by hand (as it might well have been) I've genuinely no idea how they managed the complexity of that design task. Sometimes you need to see that someone has completely outclassed you in order to break free and take your own thinking to the next level. So yes, when there are Japanese or German or any other cars that stand out as major design advances, you can be sure Ford and GM and all the other major manufacturers have them in review and teardown the day they start coming off the assembly line.
My guess is that this was the first one Ford was able to buy at any price....
"RIM was even in denial the day after the iPhone was announced with all hands meets claiming all manner of weird things about iPhone: it couldn’t do what they were demonstrating without an insanely power hungry processor, it must have terrible battery life, etc. Imagine their surprise when they disassembled an iPhone for the first time and found that the phone was battery with a tiny logic board strapped to it. It was ridiculous, it was brilliant."
From: http://www.edibleapple.com/2010/12/28/rim-was-in-disbelief-f...
This is what innovation looks like - its so absurd that it might actually work !
[0] http://www.wired.com/2014/07/go-inside-the-lab-where-gm-tear...
Oddly VAX cost $200,000.
Very short exert http://kottke.org/14/07/the-soul-of-a-new-machine
Long exert of the book which continues the story of the VAX disassembly was published in the Atlantic called "flying upside-down".
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1981/07/flying-u...
Soul of a new machine is a really good book. highly recomended.
There are patents.
This would be a form of white box reverse engineering.
It makes me wonder how useful the information will be, since it'll likely be done by the worst engineers in the company. Why would a good engineer sign up for this job?
So I'm questioning what kind of quality work you're going to get. It doesn't seem like top engineers are going to want to take that job, and in fact it'll probably be the bottom-of-the-barrel engineers who'll want this job because it's a stable paycheck and there's zero room for creativity or inventiveness. So what kind of results are you going to get, by not having really talented and knowledgeable engineers looking at it?
I do realize that not all engineers want to do development: that's why we have test engineers. I've dealt with test engineers before; they're a special breed, and have a real talent for finding weaknesses and enjoy that challenge a lot. That's rather different than just disassembling something and documenting it. There's no challenge there, like there is in testing something to its breaking point and finding its weaknesses so you can make it better.
To the degree there is protected IP, it would be covered by patents. Which are public. That's the point of a patent. And it doesn't matter if you were aware of the original art or not if you violate a patent.
If there are merely trade secrets/techniques that Tesla or anyone else simply hoped no one would be able to deduce but weren't otherwise protected, those are fair game.
*Edit:
Here is more about the history of the car itself: http://ateupwithmotor.com/model-histories/lexus-ls400/
(I checked because this comment sounded an awful lot like a PR exercise for Lexus.)
The post does sound like a PR exercise for Lexus, but do a quick web search and you will be impressed with how good the Lexus was back then. They still are great cars. I have never nor do I have any future projects or connections with Toyota/Lexus or any of its affiliates. I just think they build good stuff. :)
Strikes me that a reasonable sized team would cost that per-day.
What if it is to try to find patents they can sue over?
Making them public is part of patenting anythong I think.
Plus, does 1 engineer really know all parts of the Tesla? Can he tell you about the types of lugs used on the wheels? Can he also tell you about the type of glass used in the windows, or the type of leather used in the seats? If cars are anything like software, each engineer knows like 5% of the total product..
It is certainly possible to fully understand a car down to minute detail. It's even easier if you get briefed on design decisions.
Sure, a single human can have a decent understanding of everything in it, but not down to the deep details. There just isn't enough time to learn all of that.
That's excessive for automotive software, however; you do some device drivers here and there but ain't going to modify the memory allocator or process scheduler. How much detail Musk keeps on to here is open to speculation. On my part, I can say the industrial products I developed I understand really well. Starting from where and why ejector pins on diecasting molds go, the particular conductor plate used for spot welding, wire gage in the cable bundles, through kernel drivers, FPGA programming, EMC compliance issues in PCB layout to how many units fit on a euro pallet.. and am no Elon Musk. Don't sell your ability short.
Now a car? NO WAY, not even Musk.
The question was not about building however, but understanding the design of the whole thing down to a fine detail.