Hacker News Reader

The body on an electric car is basically no different to an ICE car. The floor is flatter and thicker to accommodate the battery pack and no need for a tunnel to accommodate the drive train, but other than that they're about the same.

Tesla will almost certainly be using a combination of materials on the model 3; mild steels (cheap and cheerful, easy to press), aluminium (lightweight) and boron steels (strong). To join these materials you need a variety of techniques including resistance spot welding, aluminium RSW (altogether more difficult than steel because of the low melting point and high conductivity, and the fact that weld spatter sticks to the tip of the gun), riveting (for steel-Al joints), structural adhesives, flow drill screws, laser welds etc. All of these processes take serious time to calibrate and get right, and some are not all that robust (by high volume standards).

There are many quality loops with a vehicle launch. The tooling needs to be proven out. Tools get shimmed relentlessly to make up for panel variations - panel quality can vary from batch to batch within a press run. This is especially true for mixed material cars.

Believe me, these are not easy problems to solve and nothing I've seen and heard out of Tesla makes me think they've addressed any of these issues.

Is it possible that Musk has solved the problem, much like he or his employees have solved countless other tech problems, but Musk also knows what makes a sexy headline. Spot welding is hard to sell as flashy and new. If you can't do it on mars, it might not make good headlines.

If Musk solved the problem, they'd be producing the Model S faster already. ;)

Spot welding isn't hard, and wasn't claimed to be hard. Mixed Materials welding and joining is Hard (steel + aluminium/mild steel + high strength steel/ etc).

It isn't even that it's hard. I mean, it's been done before, many times. But there are processes here with a stack of key control parameters that can and will drift.

Panels will not be consistent - they never are (and you'd be surprised at the variation). Rivets will tumble in feed tubes or get trapped in escapements. Vision systems will get confused by ambient light or reflections at certain times of day. Weld spatter will accumulate on tips, and frequent tip dressing will change weld parameters (timing, pressure, current etc). Adhesives will be effected by temperature, humidity. Batches of sealer might not be consistent. Weld timers will fail. Power supplies will fail. Flow drill screws will deform, go off centre and be a bitch to get right. Laser welder lens will accumulate weld crud. People will mis-load parts. PIA bits will come in below the required quality. Tools will get shimmed wrong. Robots will be badly programmed.

All of this stuff will take time to get right. It isn't impossible, but it is very difficult to get a line performing reliably. Tesla will be integrating a lot of new technologies, and at volumes that they are not used to, in an area with no serious history of car building, in a high wage state. I doubt they can get the people to manage the line and maintain this equipment.

You make it sound like we already know about most of the problems and there is a ton of room for improvement in the current systems.

Isn't this exactly what Musk and his employees are good at fixing? I have seen no reason to bet against Musk, Your complaint is the same as the others saying he cannot do something. You seem to have expertise in how a thing is done now, not in how well it could be done.

He might be late, but he won't fail. As it is this is the scheduled shortened by 6 months.

If electric cars are so simple, why is the Tesla Model S so unreliable?

https://www.truedelta.com/Tesla-Model-S/reliability-1095

Conversely, the Toyota Prius is one of the most reliable cars. Yet it is mechanically complex with both an internal combustion engine and an electric motor, plus a CVT. So clearly engineering skill and manufacturing quality are bigger factors than the drive train.

The Model S drivetrain is reasonably reliable. Most of the reliability problems (and I believe they have an average score now, not great but not terrible) are other parts of the car. Tesla likes their unnecessary "cool" tech, which also tends to break. The Model S has the extending door handles, and the X has ridiculous doors. Not that it's limited to these aspects of the vehicle, of course.

Note that the Prius doesn't have a CVT the way you'd normally think of one. It has a fixed planetary gear set which is able to somewhat emulate a CVT by using two electric motor-generators in conjunction with the engine. I mention this only because "CVT" usually makes people think of painful friction-based transmissions, whereas the Prius's transmission is much simpler than even a normal transmission. Your point that engineering skill and manufacturing quality are the main factors is spot-on.

How unreliable are ICEs these days - maybe its just me, but I've never had an engine problem in nearly 20 years of owning cars. Electrical problems, suspension problems, drainage problems - had all of them but never had a problem with the actual engine.

Car guy here. Internal Combustion Engines have some pretty complex systems that pure electric systems don't need. Water cooling and engine oil spring to mind. Timing belts need to be changed, transition systems have problems with some regularity. (Granted, most performance electric cars have a transmission too, but you can almost get away without one, so I'm going to assume more simplicity of design)

Not arguing one way or another just providing data. My only electric car is an old converted Porsche. (Transmission is still there but you can basically slap it in third and leave it there) I'll never have to change the oil on that one again, and the electric motor is simple as can be. Battery management is kind of a pain, but that's because I don't have the kind of advanced battery management a mass market car would have.

I don't have enough data yet, but my experience suggests that electric cars will have a much lower maintenance load simply because of the reduced complexity. Of course all the automation and bells and whistles will still break, and the computer control systems will get wonky.

The last internal engine problem I had was with a 200cid (3.2 liter) inline six from Ford - the pistons had to be de-carboned after a cross-country drive. This was in 1985, so I blame the 55 mph national speed limit for not letting the engine run harder. Ever since - I just do 5000 mile oil changes and 3 year coolant changes, and all is well. They're really quite reliable these days, even as the complexity has gone up with turbos, direct injection, variable valve timing, and so on.

Maybe it depends on the age of your car and how you drive it? I've had 4 Honda Accords from an 88 up to an 07 that all started exhibiting the same engine problems around the 200k mile mark. Blown head gaskets, burning oil, timing belt issues, etc.

I assume you were replacing the timining belts on schedule. Given the near legendary reliability of the Honda Accord it makes me wonder if there's something about the way you drive.

Even so, 200,000 miles is not too shabby. I don't think we have useful data on electric vehicles with that kind of mileage.

I have a honda with 226,000 miles. Starts and runs like new.

I have replaced timing belt and water pump and motor mounts in addition to regular fluid changes. The timing belt and water pump work was proactive maintenance (the timing belt drives the water pump so they suggest replacing both at once since it's not really any extra work).

The motor mounts simply wore out. Not expensive to replace. Rubber mounts will wear out on a Tesla too, eventually.

What is a drainage problem?

I had a Passat a few years back and it had a design flaw where the tray that holds the battery has drain holes that can get blocked and if they do it overflows into the interior of the car.

I used to park my car under trees that dropped leaves which blocked the battery compartment drainage holes and as I am in Scotland it can get quite wet. Ended up with car filled with 1" of water.... Interior of car had to be stripped, dried out and put back in by the dealer.

I'm always tempted to test drive stylish German cars but I swear 90% of the maintenance horror stories I've heard in the last 15 years have involved a German car.

VW in particular has a pretty poor reputation for long term reliability (also see Consumer Reports et al). The stories I hear about American cars, by contrast, tend to be poor reliability soon after purchase (followed by solid long term reliability)

Not sure I would describe a Passat as "stylish" :-)

It's when you realize your OEM sunroof leaks just like an '70s aftermarket sunroof but there is a drain that keeps you from noticing. Or there was a drain, now it's full of dirt and debris and doesn't drain very well.

Window and trunk leaks

Turbo-diesel fuel injection pumps are ... not the most reliable thing to have in a car.

Because (personal opinion) the Tesla Model S isn't a particularly great car. Their success is largely in marketing, network, and visual appeal, not in the product itself.

If you pick a better (albeit less appealing) electric car, the reliability rate skyrockets. For instance, using your own source -- https://www.truedelta.com/Nissan-LEAF-vs-Tesla-Model-S-relia...

^ This. The Model S has a lot more in common with a mid-high range Mercedes or a low end Ferrari. Anybody who owns an exotic car like that will tell you, you do not buy those for the reliability.

It's also worth noting the Model S is, and is marketed to the audience for, a performance car. When you put down that kind of money, you're going to drive it like one. If you drove a Honda like a Ferrari you'd likely break a whole lot of it's "reliable" parts too.

A Mercedes limousine is hardly exotic, and neither is it unreliable.

What I found the most interesting in that comparison is that the Tesla, although having a lot more problems in other areas, had 0% issues in brakes and suspension.

Are they using some different much more advanced technology for those parts, or it's just some problem with the repair data?

I can only speak for the brakes. Teslas use regenerative braking on the motor before falling back to traditional frictional brake pads as I understand it. Essentially the motor is put in reverse and that drains off speed. That means less wear on the brakes and so they last much, much longer than an ICE car.

My ICE car has regenerative braking. So this is not something exclusive to the EVs.

Regenerative braking only works if there is spare battery capacity to absorb the energy. In general that requires a large battery to be useful. A normal car battery is nowhere near large enough and is generally topped off by the alternator.

My ICE car has regenerative braking as well, but I certainly didn't buy it for that, nor have I been able to discern the impact of it. I have driven EVs before and the regenerative braking is unmistakable.

Really? Don't you need a big electric motor for that... and some substantial lithium ion batteries? Is your ICE car a hybrid?

No, it is not a hybrid. But it uses brake energy regeneration to charge car's battery when you are not accelerating. The effect is not as pronounced as on EV cars, but enough to not use brakes often in normal traffic. In the context of the GP statement, it does reduce some brake pads wear.

ICE hybrids use regenerative breaking.

Actually the Prius is less mechanically complex than a normal ICE-Car. The planetary gear is really simple and you don't need parts which are prone to wear like a high torque clutch or a complex gearbox.

It is very reliable not despite but because of it's unique powertrain concept.

My friend put 100,000 miles on his Tesla in a year and was never stranded. He drove 30,000 miles on a known faulty motor.

It's not more unreliable than an ICE vehicle. It's significantly more simple in design and for repair. These claims are FUD.

This seems unbelievable. That is 500 charge discharge cycles at 200 miles apiece. Since there are only 365 days in a year This means that your friend was driving more than 270 miles a day meaning he was at 55 mph that is 5 hours a day. This is on the order of a professional trucker once you count weekends.

This also discounts the difficultly of finding well space out chargers. It also discounts the schedule of your friend. This also makes me wonder what time you have left to socialize with your 'friend'.

If you are going to make bold claims some explanation of the detail would go a long way towards making them seem plausible.

Well when someone gets a million dollar settlement from their employer and gets to keep their Tesla paid for outright and has nothing better to do for a year they just drive around the country. So that's what he did.

> insisted it was fake, as there was "no way" someone could build and profitably sell a phone with that feature-set

A little context here might be good. The supposed disbelief of Blackberry was their carrier deal, as they themselves were not _allowed_ to sell phones with that feature set.

It wasn't unthinkable to build it engineering-wise. (It was expensive yet with underwhelming features, a 2G phone with no apps at a time when even feature phones had 3G and apps for almost five years.) It was unthinkable business-wise. Those rules are easier to play hard and fast with.

That there is unfounded criticism doesn't mean all criticisms is unfounded.

The carrier deal was also a surprise to them, but if you believe this anonymous former RIM engineer they also didn't think it was possible to do what the iPhone did and still have acceptable battery life:

"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."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2044389

The iPhone is now a 10 year old device still selling like crazy. Thanks for the link.

I'm not sure how realities of production get beaten by "ideas". Yes, Tesla has excellent design and approach. That won't help them magically build in volume. Or quality - even very expensive Model S cars aren't really a paragon of build quality in their class.

Steve Jobs didn't promise production of 300mil iPhones in a year when they announced it.

I don't know if you've heard of this little thing called The Law of Accelerating Returns.

It's the law.

Ok, I get it, do not mock The Law of Accelerating Returns.

Even just using Tesla's numbers, it's unlikely they can ramp up production.

They currently produce ~25K Model X and S per quarter, and they're having supply issues with battery packs. (see the other, recent thread on them)

How in the world are they going to be producing 20K Model 3s by December, without cannibalizing their more profitable existing sales, and judging by their own previous growth rate and demand problems?

> they're having supply issues with battery packs.

They are building a huge factory for making battery packs in Nevada. That's already operational and will be more so by December. I imagine that's part of the solution.