Hacker News Reader

Comment by samcheng | Hacker News Reader

This is the company that pioneered the automotive gasoline engine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlieb_Daimler

It's pretty clear (once you drive an EV) that a sea change is coming - they have reached the point where they are a superior driving experience most of the time.

As other evidence, Tesla announced today that they are planning a major expansion of their supercharging network.

https://www.tesla.com/supercharger

I wonder if we'll be talking about Tesla in a hundred years the same way we talk about Mercedes today?

View on HN

> company that pioneered the automotive gasoline engine.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottlieb_Daimler

Correct company, wrong guy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Benz

Daimler invented the motorcycle, Benz the car.

Daimler and Benz merged to form Daimler-Benz.

Tesla compares probably more to the developer of the modern Tire. I think their main innovation is mass producing batteries. And I also believe that car ownership in Cities is going away with self driving cars. Google will probably go for offering free rides for sponsored destinations and become a major portal to the offline world.

Isn't that Panasonic, who have been making batteries for decades? I love Tesla as much as the rest, though I feel that Panasonic's expertise may be understated in the Tesla partnership. Though I may be very ignorant.

I, too, am under that impression, in general.

In particular, however, there is one notable source that emphasizes Panasonic's role: Tesla's SEC filings. Quoting TSLA's 2015 10-K[1]:

We believe that the Gigafactory will allow us to achieve a significant reduction in the cost of our battery packs once we are in volume production with Model 3. The total capital expenditures associated with the Gigafactory through 2020 are expected to be $4 to $5 billion, of which approximately $2 billion is expected to come from Tesla. Panasonic has agreed to partner with us on the Gigafactory with investments in production equipment that it will use to manufacture and supply us with battery cells. We have a supply agreement with Panasonic that, among other things, allows us to purchase a minimum of 1.8 billion lithium-ion battery cells at preferential prices that we intend to purchase from 2014 through 2017. We have agreed to prepare and provide the land, buildings and utilities, invest in production equipment for battery module and pack production and be responsible for the overall management of the Gigafactory.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000156459016...

If people go from owning a cellphone battery with 4 Wh to a 65.000 Wh car battery and a 20.000 Wh home battery, battery production have to be extremely increased.

Yes, there are massive investments from many companies in expanding the battery production industry.

Gigafactory 1, in Reno, is a $5B capital investment that aims to produce 50GWh of batteries in 2018, and if they get $100/kWh in 2018, far lower than current prices, then yearly revenue is the same as the cost of Gigafactory 1.

So there's tons of room to grow lithium ion manufacturing capacity. That's only one part of the supply chain though... Looking just at lithium, there seems to be somewhat ample supply for the next few years from proven reserves, so I'm sure there are plenty of people scaling up for production from new sites.

Let's put it this way: Would Panasonic have achieved just as much for EVs if it had made the partnership with any other carmaker?

To me it's been obvious that the other carmakers were dragged into the EV race, and they would've rather not see it happen at all. It's quite hilarious seeing around the time the Model S came out and soon after, how the other car makers were still "one-upping" each other with 65-mile range, 70, 75, 80 - by continuing to repackage gas-powered car platforms into EVs. And those were the "full EV" versions, not the hybrid ones or whatnot. Those still had like 20-30 mile ranges in their batteries.

I think it would've taken at least another 15 years until one of them would've decided to just rethink an EV from scratch. Their love was status quo was all too obvious.

There are some who say Apple is Messiah on Earth and they've invented all smartphone features and they deserve to ask $2,000 for an iPhone (see latest iPhone thread for such opinions). I completely disagree with those, even though I was one of the "fanbois" preaching an iPhone in the "Nokia is still king" days.

And then there are others who say Apple invented and innovated nothing. zero. nada. And the smartphone industry would've progressed in exactly the same way without them, too. I say that's also bullcrap. Not only did Apple completely change the mobile phone landscape, but it has pretty much changed it every year afterwards (see the wave of "retina displays", or fingerprint auth, or 2x optical zoom from last year - all being adopted at a rapid pace by everyone soon after Apple did it).

I see opinions about Tesla split the same way. In my mind, Tesla is the first successful car company in 100 years to not just exist and survive but to reshape the car industry. They haven't invented everything either, but I give them a lot of credit for the awareness EVs have now (and will have in the next few years).

I guess my point is you don't have to have extreme opinions about a company in order to give it the credit that it's due.

Tesla is much, much sexier and better at PR than Panasonic.

You mention the superior driving experience. Are you talking about a Mistubishi i-MiEV or a Model S here? Your experience with a Model S isn't just because it's electric, it's also a really expensive car. I somehow doubt that if you drove the Mistubishi, you would say the same thing.

I have a CLA250 loaner while my Model S is in the shop, and the drivetrain is just amazingly atrocious. Now, it's not fair to compare it to a Model S, but a Model 3 has a similar price to the CLA250 but will drive like the Model S. (I have an 85, not one of the crazy performance models. Its published 0-60 is about the same as the Model 3's.)

After driving an EV for a while, this Mercedes feels like the accelerator is hooked up to the engine through the postal service. You push the accelerator and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and finally the car starts to go.

What you experience in the CLA250 is a combination of turbo lag and an electronic throttle optimizing for low fuel consumption. There should be an option where you can engage sport mode to increase the throttle response and also prevent the gearbox from selecting a high gear to keep revs low.

I drive a car with the VW EA888 2.0 (230BHP@4000RPM, 370lb-ft@1600RPM) and it is possible to have near immediate throttle response and pull provided you're familiar with the gear ratios and power curve of the car. However, it's also a manual, so I don't have the disadvantage of being caught out in the wrong gear.

I'll have to give it a try in sport mode this afternoon and see how much better it is. "Near immediate" sounds an awful lot like "near pregnant" though.

You'll find that it will cause the car to hold gears almost up to redline, which isn't great in traffic or when cruising. Whenever I drive an automatic, I ALWAYS use the paddle shifters and put the gearbox into manual mode so I have complete control over gearing.

That's one of the really really great things about electric cars: they are always ready to go, without having to control the gearbox.

Now, there's a tiny percentage of the population that enjoys paddle shifters, and even I do sometimes, but if we had usage tracking on them I would bet that fewer than 10% of drivers use paddle shifters for more than 5 times in the lifetime of the car, and that cars with paddle shifters are in automatic transmission mode 99.9% of miles driven.

So though some people will miss the gearbox, far far far more will rejoice in having a car that is always at maximum performance without messing with things.

I find automatics in 'D' will try to keep themselves in too high of a gear (practically idling around, presumably to save fuel) so a downshift is needed to accelerate

'S' behaves more like a human driving a manual - I assume the MPG and emissions testing is done in 'D'

I've tried the paddle shifters but they work poorly. Half the time it doesn't even register them. I'll be revving high, press the + paddle, and nothing changes.

Edit: so, I went to try sport mode and... turns out I've been driving around in sport mode all weekend already. Tried out "comfort" mode just to compare and couldn't see any difference. I'm sure a better driver could, but both are far away from instant response.

I've also got a Mercedes loan car, after a truck ripped the front off my Model X 90D.

The Mercedes S 350 is so much more sluggish than either my Model X or my Renault Zoe. Put foot down, wait half a second, and make a ridiculous noise in the process. I have to use the brakes way more often because of the lack of regen, too.

I am utterly convinced after 4 years of EV driving that 90% of drivers would switch to EVs for life, if they got to try one for a few weeks.

Driving the Merc feels like using an HTC Vario compared to an iPhone.

That's too bad. I thought maybe this was just a consequence of He CLA being a relatively low-end Mercedes.

I have a Mercedes C300, owned a CLA 45 AMG, and have driven a Tesla Model S for about 50 miles once. I loved my CLA, but I traded it for a C300 and made money off the deal (CLA AMGs are in hot demand).

The CLA 45 had a great engine but suffered from a conservative transmission shifting algorithm. Sport mode was fine but comfort mode was designed for "A to B" driving at low fuel consumption. It also has responsiveness problems from full stop - this wasn't turbo lag per se, as if you don't notice it in launch mode. Once you got going, it was very fast.

The Tesla interior is nearly identical to a Mercedes-Benz interior (they use many of the same parts), with the exception of the large tablet screen on the Tesla. It feels more like the low-end CLA interior than the wood grain C-class which feels more like the S-class. The Model S backseat is cramped compared to the Mercedes, it is more like the BMW 3-Series in terms of leg room. Practically speaking I would go with a Model X.

That said, to me while the throttle response of the Tesla was truly amazing, the regenerative slowdown effect was.. weird. I really didn't like it. Given the price difference between the C-Series and Model S ($55k vs 95k in Canada, and $130k or More for a model X), I think the C-class will continue to win out except for those with significantly more income. Tesla sells a better car, but not 2x better. Mercedes has time to catch up with its own EV.

The price difference certainly makes it a bit unreasonable to compare the CLA and the Model S. But the Model 3 is a different story. The 3 should drive very similarly to the non-performance non-AWD Ss (like mine), and the price is similar to the CLA.

The parts similarity weirded me out a bit. It was strange having the exact same gear shifter and turn signal lever in a completely different car. But both companies seem to have good taste in that respect.

As far as the regen, I personally really like it, and you might too once you got used to it. It's really nice to only use one pedal for most driving. However, if it really is not to your taste, you can turn it down in the settings. The result is much like an automatic car, where you only get very mild braking when you release the accelerator. Of course, you sacrifice some efficiency and brake life when you do this.

> this Mercedes feels like the accelerator is hooked up to the engine through the postal service

I feel a similar difference between an automatic and a manual transmission car.

I was driving a Cupra 290 on the Nurburgring last week and I kept getting caught out by the kick-down feature on the DSG gearbox - even in Cupra (sport) mode.

For example, I'd be exiting Breidscheid and the car would be in 4th instead of 3rd. Then there is then a good half second waiting for the DSG to downshift before power is available. In which time, I've just been overtaken by someone with a manual gearbox...

It's really tough to beat the brain's mental timing once you've got a good feel for exactly when you should engage the accelerator once you've released the clutch.

I've only driven a car with a DSG like that once, and I did find the timing of the shift a little disconcerting compared to that of releasing the clutch in time with the accelerator.

It was fast, and undoubtedly faster than I could double clutch with a manual clutch, but it still felt slow.

Similar price? CLA250 is 2.5 times cheaper than P85. It is also 2.5 seconds slower going 0-60. Not really sure where are you getting your data from...

Where did you get "P85" from? My Model S is an 85, no P, with a published 0-60 of about 5.6 seconds. "Similar price" refers to the Model 3, not any Model S. The Model 3 starts at $35,000, the CLA250 starts at $32,700, that's pretty similar to me.

Would it trouble you to read the comment you're replying to, or at least drop the attitude if you won't?

Sorry, did not realize you have S85, which is still 1.5 seconds faster.

Your claim that Model 3 will run like S have no grounds. All you can honesty do is to compare that Benz to your S85.

The more I get into cars the more I find 0-60 to be a poor metric for performance because it comes down to all wheel drive, traction (good OEM tires are a must) and short gearing. Power is important, but less so than the others. For evidence of this compare the extra long geared GT4 with the Carrera S, both of which have the same 3.8 flat-6 and more or less the same power output.

What most people want to compare (but don't know it) are torque curves and power bands. I.e. how does the engine make its power and where is it in the rev range. We know that EVs provide constant torque, hence max power is available at all times (provided there is sufficient traction). When it comes to ICEs the situation much more complex. NAs tend to make all their power at the top of the rev range and torque peaks at around 3,000/4,000RPM. Turbo engines tend to make their power around 1,000RPM below redline and provide peak torque between 1600/3000RPM (the min can be higher for lower-displacement engines or engines with big turbos). However, off-boost, there is a noticeable absence of power, but this diminishes as displacement increases.

I find it's these figures that need to be compared as the are much more indicative about acceleration in gear, smoothness and where the engine and gearing needs to be to make power.

1.5 seconds faster than what? I compared 0-60 times between the S and the 3. The Model 3's published 0-60 is 5.1 or 5.6 seconds depending on whether you look at the base model or the long-range model.

I'm quite confident that the Model 3 drives like my Model S. Acceleration is clearly similar, zero-lag is pretty much an inherent property of the EV drivetrain, and there's no reason to suspect otherwise.

I agree with his statement and I drive a used Nissan Leaf. Despite Nissan's assertions to the contrary, the Leaf doesn't strike me as being an EV built from the ground up but an ICEV converted.

The car is a lot of fun to drive and after having driven it for many months, driving an ICEV is unpleasant. EVs drive very smoothly without all of the acceleration or deceleration lurch of an ICE drive train. There's no power lag, when I drive an ICE now I have to remember about the power lag and it's frankly annoying.

EVs are quiet and it's a little unnerving at first. After you're use to it you notice how noisy ICEV are and it's unpleasant.

ICEV smell, there's no way around it. I had to buy gas for my lawnmower a week ago and I can still smell it in the Leaf. It also struck me as to how dirty fuel stations are, something I never really noticed before. With an EV you avoid all of that unpleasantness and just plug in at home or your destination. If you do have to stop, the charging stations aren't crusted with grime that I assume comes from fuel or fumes mixing with dirty and sticking to everything.

They are more convenient. Routine maintenance is just coolant, battery, and tire checks a few times a year instead of weekly stops for gas and going for oil changes every couple months, on top of other maintenance checkups.

EVs aren't perfect but after having owned one for a few months I definitely won't go back to an ICEV as my daily driver without a fight.

What car requires an oil change every couple of months?

For every car I ever owned before this year, they recommended an oil change every 3,000 miles (a little more than two months for me) or at most three months. I don't know if they got that much better or the recommendations were loosened to match observed problems.

Most modern cars can/do use fully synthetic oil, which can last ~10k+ miles.

2013 or newer yes, but anything older it's recommended ever 3000 or less.

I drive a Leaf daily. Owned a petrol family sedan for 8 years before that and drive all kind of ICE medium-to-premium class rentals (stick and auto) on trips. You get to pay through the nose before a petrol vehicle begins to compare to an entry level electric in driving experience.

The problem is the Leaf still starts at $31,000. go up a couple trim levels, and we're in the $36,000 range easily. That's not an entry level car. Not by any stretch of the imagination. I can get one hell of a nice gas powered car that will blow the Leaf away in any measure. (edit, except one, obviously).

Those rental cars you drove were probably significantly cheaper than the Leaf as well. Again, I'm just reinforcing that having an electric drivetrain doesn't turn the car into some magical nice car. You're still paying for that premium experience.

Well I had a CLK, a Q5 and some kind of Lexus as rentals; none of them is terribly cheap. Especially here in Norway, where Leaf starts at about $26k and is one of the cheapest cars you can buy.

(CLK was OK, the Audi and Lexus clearly inferior).

Should also take into account that it saves you a huge amount on petrol

> a superior driving experience most of the time.

I think that objectively that is still some time off, however I am not disagreeing that modern EV's are a "good" experience at any stretch.

Once they work out how to lessen the weight behind the batteries, you'll get the driving experience comparable and beyond modern performance cars - but while the EV's have huge torque etc they still feel quite heavy in the corners, and don't deliver the same kind of driving experience for someone who values handling dynamics. I mean, a P100D can slaughter most factory cars off the line, but my mx5 (miata) track car still eats them on a technical circuit.

Regarding Tesla's network, they've added a location (not yet active as of last night's grocery run) at a Meijer near me with probably 10+ charging stations along with some fairly hefty looking power cabinets.

What has Telsa done that is completely novel? Telsa looks just like another car company. You mentioned Daimler pioneering the ICE but where are the Telsa inventions?

I think Telsa's greatest contribution will be moving the electric car and renewable markets. Whether or not the company itself will be successful is yet to be seen. To me they only make products that are affordable by the rich but they've certainly been successful in moving markets.

They made the first fully electric sports car (Roadster).

They made the first fully electric luxury car (Tesla S).

They created the first super-charger network. It's still the largest network of its kind.

They are the first car company to also be a large-scale battery manufacturer.

They are the first car company that pre-sold half a million cars.

They are on track to deliver fully electric mass market (as defined by volume) car. Tesla 3 is expected to reach production/sales of 0.5 - 1 million a year, easily surpassing any single competing, fully electric car.

Yes, Tesla is a car company but they already did plenty to deserve a little more than "just another".

Your statements read like a Tesla marketing pamphlet.

In 1900 28% of the cars produced in the US were electric. Albeit only a little more than 4,000 were produced. In those days all cars were luxury items, a horse was non-luxury. They also held the land speed records vs ICE prior to 1900.

Didn't Telsa partner with Panasonic to build the battery factory? Panasonic has been making batteries for years.

They've only built 200k cars total! Probably more since March.

On track to deliver...let's see if they can meet their target.

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/223/electric-car-timeline.html

>Your statements read like a Telsa marketing pamphlet.

You asked a question and they directly answered it for you.

You probably also have a similar opinion of Apple then because they were not the first company in the world selling an MP3 player?

Apple has proved itself over the past 3 decades with everything from PCs, MP3 players, and now phones.

I could afford the later 2 devices on a sub 20k a year college restaurant jobs salary. At the time I bought both of them.

Telsa is not affordable by the majority of people with their currently available models. While a Nissan Leaf is pretty affordable especially adding in the tax break the government and my state used to offer.

> I could afford the later 2 devices on a sub 20k a year college restaurant jobs salary.

> Tesla is not affordable by the majority of people with their currently available models.

By that standard, the company who invented fidget spinners made a bigger contribution to society than Tesla because more people can afford their products.

I'm not the one claiming Tesla or fidget spinners are revolutionary devices.

Fidget spinners are literally revolutionary...

There is no company behind fidget spinners.

> They made the first fully electric sports car (Roadster).

Does the tZero from AC Propulsion that inspired the Tesla Roadster not get the credit because it was just a kit car?

". No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."

>>What has Telsa done that is completely novel?

They've pushed battery technology further than any other manufacturer in the last decade. And furthermore, "they've been successful in moving markets" is a novel thing in itself.

>>To me they only make cars that are affordable by the rich but they've certainly been successful in moving markets.

What do you think the first people said about Daimler?

>They've pushed battery technology further than any other manufacturer in the last decade.

Not really. They've done a lot to bring down costs by simply increasing the scale, but at the end of the day Tesla battery packs are just a bunch of standard 18650 cells that have been used for years. Panasonic, LG, and AESC are responsible for most of the advances in the actual chemistry.

And advances get funded in the long term through sales.

Gigafactory is to produce the new 2170 form factor.

The car and engine were just being invented in Daimlers time. Both batteries and cars have over a 100 years of work before Telsa was stated.

They use lithium batteries. You could even buy the same types of cells on amazon that Telsa uses, 18650.

>>You could even buy the same types of cells on amazon that Telsa uses, 18650.

This is a lot like saying you can buy the same food resources that go into world class restaurants. Technically true, yes. But does not diminish the accomplishments of Tesla in the least.

Exactly, just like that uninventive louse they are named after. Wires? Existed before. Magnets? Long history. Rotating fields? Over 75 years old at that point. All he did was come up with a winding pattern. Pfft, big deal.

We didn't point out tires as the revolutionary new Telsa addition to the stack. Wires and magnets are irrelevant. Batteries and cars are the items Telsa claims to revolutionize.

It's spelled Tesla, not Telsa.

As for the impact of Tesla, wait a few more years, then it'll be clearer to see.

Not sure what my iPhone is thinking with Telsa.

If Tesla folds in a few years everyone will just point at Leafs and whatever else is out saying look Tesla was the one who started this.

Tesla fans will say it either way.

> "If Tesla folds in a few years everyone will just point at Leafs and whatever else is out saying look Tesla was the one who started this.

Tesla fans will say it either way."

Why do you think that is?

Show me a couple examples where Tesla has invented something new or become the market leader without outside help. Meaning if you say home battery market I'd argue Panasonic is the leader.

I'll do so after you answer my earlier question, why do you think people are fans of Tesla?

Not really, it would be like Tesla (world class restaurant) partnering with Blue Apron (Panasonic) to develop a world class factory to supply all of Teslas restaurants.

What I've heard from people associated with Tesla over the years is that the battery management and packaging technology is their main technical innovation.

It allowed them to use existing battery chemistry and cells to provide incredibly high power output (Ludicrous mode) while also preserving the lifetime and capacity of the battery, which is no simple feat.

Someone who works at Tesla/Solarcity told me recently that the same approach is behind the Solar Roof: existing PV cell technology but with very novel packaging.

This is, in general, Tesla's real advantage: top class systems engineering. EV's will be a commodity item in the near future, but the underlying systems will not be. I expect Tesla to dominate the software side of things, including battery management, autonomous, etc.

Thanks for replying with details.

Do you have any sources? Genieunely curious to learn about what makes them special.

From a technological perspective, they're simply applying green solutions via battery innovation into the automotive industry. Simple as that. Anyone else can also do it, such as Chevrolet with the Bolt.

What makes them different is how they have captured the public's imagination via creating incredible supercar-like performance purely using electricity.

What they've essentially done is solidified the public perception of Tesla being at the forefront of a revolution.

It's the same thing that makes something like Apple special. On a cost-performance ratio, if you build your PC from scratch, you will likely get better specs and performance for a much cheaper price. But it won't be an Apple device or enact within the apple ecosystem.

Someone will probably build a better 100% electric car (eventually) but nobody will have the same level of cultural cache. There will always be nitpickers who can say that the eventual BMW/Audi/Ferarri electric car is hotter than the Tesla, but it will never be as revolutionary as Tesla.

Tesla, Apple, Google, Facebook. These, and likely a few more companies, have transcended their mediums to make them truly special not only within their respective industries but societally as well.

People who worked at either Tesla or other companies that developed electric vehicle tech (i.e Aeroenvironment for the ill fated GM EV1 [1]).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1

"What has Telsa done that is completely novel?"

While it's not that sexy, I think that distributing the batteries throughout the very bottom of the vehicle was a novel and very useful innovation.

The Tesla cars have a much, much lower center of gravity than any ICE car could have and that is a figure/measurement that seems to matter enough to people that car magazines discuss CoG when reviewing new cars. It helps a lot with handling and safety.

All wheel drive with multiple motors, while not a Tesla innovation, is also something they are doing that is a pretty big leap forward in that space. It's hard to get excited about Quattro when the Tesla gets AWD from two different motors.

I think you'll find Honda put the battery along the floor pan back in the late 90's

https://icdn-4.motor1.com/images/mgl/WAg3r/s3/honda-ev-plus....

Im not excited by Quattro, I prefer a transfer case and complete control over the system instead of a viscous coupling doing the thinking for me. The ground clearance, maintenance cost, and oil burning issues of the 4 cylinder was a deal breaker on an A4.

Well I did opt for an engine that didn't have an ELSD available in the 2016 model or lockers in any configuration. Should've bought a Wrangler.

They are the Apple of the car industry (vertically integrated, focusing on top of market). Apple, after decades of being "beleaguered", is now the most valuable company in the world by market cap (and has been for the last 5+ years).

Tesla is poised to have it's Apple moment soon, driving the industry forward while taking the cream off the top and profiting handsomely.

Ford was one of the original vertically integrated bahemoths. They revolutionized car manufacturing with the assembly line and many other things.

They are the old Ford of automobile manufacturers one could say.

http://www.economist.com/node/13173671

EV that you can drive >300 miles on a single charge - completely novel.

EV that accelerates from 0-60 in under 2.5 - completely novel.

Novel is something new or not resembling something formally known or used. Just because they have the best spec sheet at the moment doesn't make it novel or revolutionary.

If you look at Wikipedia it says electric cars were faster than gas cars until about 1900.

Are you suggesting you can drive a 1900 electric car for 300+ miles on a charge and go from 0-60 in 2.5s?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com