Edit: I even missed a zero, it has a 800billion valuation
But it’s about number of dollars made, not cars.
And on that metric Tesla is on par with GM and ahead of Ford. I don’t know about Toyota.
(Did you see the latest video? It's crazy how well the hands and fingers work -- and how plodding its walk still is. Even Joe Biden walks faster!)
I was involved in a study a few years back that looked (in part) at how engineering undergraduates defined entrepreneurship and startup. It fortunately the results from that part ended up on the cutting room floor to focus out main paper on something else…
Generally, to undergraduate engineers, entrepreneurship and startups are defined by the following things:
Being in Silicon Valley/San Francisco
Doing something related to technology
Being financially successful (yes…noting another finding was that they often subconsciously conflated revenue and profit, but only when told the financial data was from a “startup”)
Being controlled by their founder
In the car world that’s just getting started.
edit: (not really a great example, just wanted to play off of 'the world's oldest profession')
Better example would be calling Macy's a startup because Hudson's Bay Company was founded in the 1600s.
It's not an acceptable excuse to shrug your shoulders and say that they're new at this. The concept of delivering a vehicle isn't new and Telsa has a TON of money.
Change the genre of product to Tech / software engineering. If Telsa was a software company shipping a crap product that broke all the time and then suddenly you found out that they didn't do XYZ of industry standard you'd hold them to account for not taking standard approaches to standard problems.
Things like panel gaps are not necessarily easy fixes - i.e. what if you know the solution to a 1mm improvement, but can't easily fix it without taking the production line down for x weeks because you need to change the robot arm and conveyor system?
The zero defect thing is fixing issues early rather than fixing them at the end - not shutting down the whole line if you identify that a tolerance can be improved and waiting for the fix.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/20/toyotas-daihatsu-to-halt-veh...
1000% behind the electric push, but dang y'all, it is car company
Parent post is talking about general fit and finish (i.e. tolerances being wide), try being a production line operative and pulling the andon because you think panel gaps could be decreased.
You are supposed to be pulling it if you notice the wiring loom is broken or something like that, not just fit and finish.
Besides, people are talking in this thread like lean / six sigma are new concepts that won't be already be fully embedded in the existing Tesla plants - this stuff is basic manufacturing which will already be fully embedded, but is just misunderstood by most people.
They chose to invest in certain things (sales, manufacturing ramp up, pickup and semi development, charger network, driverless development etc.) and not in others (panel gaps, fit and finish, etc.)
Easy to decide you disagree but it is working for them.
Corporations wins are customers losses.
In Tesla case even more considering they are literally re-inventing the wheel for political purposes so the whole effort is even more ridiculous.
Consumers pay money in order not to think. The thinking has to be done by the organization who takes their money.
In Tesla's case particularly given that there is some Stockholm sydrome, Heaven's Gate type thing going on between Tesla and their customers.
I'm no "car engineer", but I doubt most of Tesla's production issues are "simple".
>Change the genre of product to Tech / software engineering. If Telsa was a software company shipping a crap product that broke all the time and then suddenly you found out that they didn't do XYZ of industry standard you'd hold them to account for not taking standard approaches to standard problems.
Software is the last comparison I would have made. First of all Tesla is a software company. Secondly, the software industry is notorious for terrible products gaining massive market share. cough Google Docs/Sheets/Slides.
It’s easy to poach engineers. It’s impossible to poach a business culture.
There's a HN meme of sorts that goes like "I can build that same website functionality in a weekend, why does company XYZ employ 5000 people to do it?!"
It's a recurring theme because there's some truth to it. Someone can indeed build the core functionality of that website in a weekend, if they ignore 99% of the difficult work of doing it in production and supporting customers and all the rest of the mundane but important parts.
Building a car isn't that hard really. Lots of people do one-off car build in their garage with basic tools and a shoestring budget. And they can build a fun car which works! Sure, it's not maintainable nor supportable but they built it and it works great.
So while Tesla is well past the guy in a garage stage, they are still at the stage of "building cars is really easy" (if you ignore all the maintainability and supportability and long tail of parts availability and everything else that established manufacturers know how to do).
Tesla is a publicly traded company, subject to all the rules and regulations of the territories it operates in.
Also, valuation is effectively meaningless. That valuation has nearly zero correlation to Tesla's actual value.
You mean 800 billion valuation?
It is a public company, so by definition it is not a startup.
They move fast and break things.
You forgot the third: they (Silicon Valley) also change the world. For the better. Most of my (and my family’s) every day work and fun are coming from SV. I would not give it up for anything else. If occasionally breaking things is the price - I am more than willing to pay it.
That's up for a through debate, but not today. Let's leave it at I don't agree that part 100%.
Were it not for Tesla, America wouldn’t be on a path towards electrified transport. The tradeoffs are incredibly germane to the topic.
So, yes, it's up for debate.
Lastly this doesn't change the fact that Tesla fared the worst in the automaking competition this year w.r.t. everyone else, and they're faking till they're making it. More automakers are always good, but more pretending is always bad (cough VW, Cummins, cough).
I never disagreed. I’m saying the case at hand, EVs, provide a potent balance of the tradeoffs Silicon Valley’s methods involve.
On one hand, you get the capacity for transformational change. Change that can be for the general good. On the other hand, we have costs ranging from a culture of normalised lying to ideological nothingburgers gaining currency due to their proximity to, well, currency.
Put another way, remove Silicon Valley from the equation and yes, we have safer cars. But we also have little reason to be optimistic about ever hitting carbon zero in this country. The latter is more globally relevant than the former.
Totally agree. But looking at specifics, and dissecting why they work or do not, helps suss out patterns.
For example, Tesla’s benefits are amplified—perhaps even characterised—by their ecosystem effect. That doesn’t happen when you have a quasi-monopoly like Facebook. On the other hand, their downsides are largely a function of lying. That’s common across Silicon Valley, and may similarly have a systematic treatment. (Or, at least, if you’re replicating the model, consider removing that in your iteration.)
Same with Silicon Valley. There are certain negative aspects to it but overall we are discussing this on the amazing supercomputer it created, with software it wrote, on platforms it maintains [1]. I seriously doubt the majority of people would want to go back to a world without SV's innovations.
[1] of course it wasn't SV alone, there were many contributions from all around the world, it's just that SV spearheaded the changes and lead us on this path.
Do you mean the military dictatorship? I’m not sure if they are reliable sources. But yes, Myanmar blames lots of their ethnic violence problems on Facebook, it couldn’t be bad governance at all right?
It's the opposite, Tesla is a huge net negative, whereas Facebook is a huge net positive.
People are so weird these days, they come to hate the stuff that they use everyday and idolise stuff that would never use nor need to use
I believe it has to do with the fact that most people really aren't happy with themselves or their lives
Tesla’s did kick off the trend of big screens in cars. I prefer buttons to touch screen interactions while driving, but many people want an iPad and Tesla made that happen.
EVs are unique in their battery requirements. They demand high-discharge, high-endurance, very fast charge batteries, and Tesla did some research on that front. What's important that they were not the sole researchers in that area.
On the other hand, they lack the know-how required to make cars efficiently and assemble them with state of the art methods (minimal/standardized fasteners, fatigue management, fast manufacturing with consistent quality and finishing, etc.).
A great visual is this video of someone snapping together much of a Model Y like legos, in ten minutes by himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lawGMl8sHzc
Another fun one is Munro's comparison of the thermal management systems for a Model Y and Ford Mach-E: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1kHsd3Ocxc
The battery chemistry and production methods didn’t change fundamentally from Goodenough’s formulation. What did was scale manufacturing. China took the lead, with A123’s tech. But Tesla showed there was demand for EVs in the rich world, and that production could be tamed such that money could be made from it. (EV batteries share little to no production footprint with cells for consumer electronics. They drain differently.)
Pretty much every EV sold in America today was financed by investors looking for the next Tesla, or announced by manufacturers in response to Tesla.
That, too, is up for discussion, but not for now. I’ll leave it by saying that, without Tesla willing to sell cars at a loss for a long time, it might be a bit less further on that path, but I think California and/or the EU would have forced it by now to get on that path, by setting goals for cars sold within their jurisdictions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_effect, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect)
There also can be discussion about whether Tesla’s path is the right pat, but that definitely is for another time.
For hybrids, maybe. California is a major oil producer [1]. That lobby counterbalanced the environmental wing for decades. If there wasn’t a mass-market EV, Sacramento wouldn’t have had many options.
> that definitely is for another time
Lol, is this a thing now? We’re obviously discussing it at this time.
[1] https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbbl_m.htm
If not for Tesla, America (& the Western world in general) might not be on a path towards private inefficient electrified road transport, leaving much more room for investment in & upselling of vastly more sustainable non-road transport, as has been done in China.
Musk in particular has form here - consistently blocking & derailing all potential high-speed rail projects for the west coast in favour of white elephants (the material result being a maintained reliance on roads, and - by extension - his big cobalt-mine-dependent business).
Musk ran California’s high-speed rail through the Central Valley?
I like public transport. But America isn’t built for it. Switching to trains would mean upending and dissolving tens of millions’ communities. There was no other path without EVs and trains galore; it was—and is—between EVs and ICE cars.
Seems a very honest interpretation of events to purport that Musk has had no influence over transport in California.
> America isn’t built for it.
That rhetoric is used the world over as an excuse to bolster against progressive innovation of all kinds. It's been debunked countless times. "Dissolving" communities to make way for rail is of course also nonsense.
You mean, America was un-built from it. We had it, but the car and oil industry lobbied it away. We can rebuild it. Don't believe the hype.
Yes. It was traumatic and widely regarded as a mistake. Given the precedent, and our massively increased per-capita resources today versus in the post-War era, you'd be fighting an army of suburban Jane Jacobs to remake America à la China or Europe.
[1] https://www.wri.org/insights/countries-adopting-electric-veh...
[2] https://cleantechnica.com/2023/02/25/us-electric-car-sales-i...
[3] https://electrek.co/2023/10/12/ev-sales-7-9-us-market-volvo-...
(Side note: the standard-range Teslas use lithium iron-phosphate batteries which don't contain cobalt.)
And that is good news because? So that 100 year from now the avg temperature would be 0.005C less because we'd have substitued the black pollutant produced by Arabs with Star and Stipes Lithium (or lithium which comes from countries that are in the sphere of influence of the US)
This effort is a spit in the face of people who are alive and have big problems right now, that's the reason why they are engaging in rolling coal as a form of protest against this nonsense.
In 2022 every fourth car sold (including petrol/diesel) was a Tesla.
https://elbil.no/om-elbil/elbilstatistikk/
https://www.elbil24.no/nyheter/hver-fjerde-nybil-var-en-tesl...
While Tesla probably played a role in EV adoption, I think you are overstating it by a lot. If the main factor wasn't economic we would see these same stats in every other country where a Tesla can be bought.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ...
And every country has been massively subsidizing ICEs since their creation, both explicitly and implicitly (by failing to price in the enormous externalities, engaging in nasty geopolitics up to and including war for oil, tolerance for enormous human atrocities and authoritarian regimes, etc).
Economics certainly matters, but there still have to be vehicles people want to actually buy and can perform as they wish. For me BEVs haven't hit that yet even though I could afford one. Like, there's been a surprisingly slow rollout when it comes to trucks, I think the Cybertruck is the first one I'd consider a real useful (in theory) truck with a minimum of a 6.5' bed. Except build quality is apparently pants, there is all the Tesla spying, and they downgraded the max range option from 500 (paper, which they also apparently lied about) miles (which even on paper would be like 300-350 miles in winter which would be a good useful range), and other problems. Even if the US Government offered me 50% subsidies or something ludicrous for a BEV truck it wouldn't matter if there's literally nothing I want to buy. I think building cars that were actively good vs what came before mattered, as does the charging network. Even if Tesla has run into awful scaling problems and founder-syndrome as happens so often that doesn't IMO negate that.
I think my comment above was indeed a bit snarky and is rightfully getting downvoted.
https://bilmagasinet.no/bilaret-2013-ble-historisk-godt/
The Leafs were small and had a very short range. They were no replacement for petrol or diesel cars for families. Unlike Tesla S and X.
If you happened to be unaware all of these Tesla-skeptics ( atleast this latest round of skeptics ) are being buoyed by this Reuters report about major problems Tesla owners have faced off late. One describing a new owner's experience with his spanking new Tesla : "The vehicle’s front-right suspension had collapsed, and parts of the car loudly scraped the road as it came to a stop."
Tesla blamed drivers for failures of parts it long knew were defective
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-musk-steering-suspension/Well, gee, no wonder that people were buying them left and right when the tax discount was about 16-20k NOK per car on average!
And that is just buying the car - Norway subsidizes electric mobility in many other ways so even today registering a new electric is cheaper than a gasoline car, despite the gas powered vehicles normally costing about 50% less.
So, please, when waving this sort of argument about, don't "forget" to put it in context.
Norway is a special case because of government policies, not because Tesla did anything particularly great there. They were just the only ones on the market at the time so people essentially had to buy a Tesla if they wanted to benefit from the generous subsidies because there simply wasn't anything else available. Today the situation is different, though.
Model Y is the most sold car model in the world in 2023.
Not quite, the Toyota Corolla and RAV-4 both outsold it
If the government discounts cars by 25% - that's one thing. But let's not forget too that the greater part of the cost of running a car (the fuel) is mainly made up by tax on the fuel - it itself is an artificial price.
Nothing about transport is reflective of the underlying reality. Its simply a governmental chess board, and could be shifted at any time by new legislation, eg if a tax is introduced to add 50% tax on the electricity used for cars.
Regardless of the worthiness of this or that cause - its most interesting that none of this the free market in action. Its also licensing, government grants, taxes... in all honesty what is the difference between this and communism - where the government overtly controls the actions of the masses?
I agree. It should start with stopping all fossil fuel subsidies, 7 trillions/year and growing. And ethanol subsides, subsidizing ethanol production on 40m acres, just in US.
And have fossil fuel companies pay for their own military to protect their 6 million assets and 16 million transportation flows[2]. It should be determined by the companies themselves (free market) if these are worth protection, instead of having Govts protect these worldwide. Solar, on the other hand, will not require there protections, it does not depend on the exploration, extraction, shipping, processing, burning, waste output of any fuel. Solar is distributed, on every roof and field, nearly impossible for anyone to invade and destroy.
[1] Global Fossil Fuel Subsidies Reached $7 Trillion in 2022, an All-Time High: https://e360.yale.edu/digest/fossil-fuel-subsidies-2022
[2] https://github.com/Lkruitwagen/global-fossil-fuel-supply-cha...
That may be true in Europe, but not here in the US. In the US, the federal gasoline tax is currently about $.18 per gallon, and state taxes range from about $.09 to $.58 per gallon[1] (with the median around $0.27). The average price of gasoline in the US has been around $3.00 per gallon[2] ($0.79 per liter), so the total tax would range from about 9% to 25% of the cost, depending on the state.
The price of gas in most European countries is much higher, with Norway paying over twice the US average (US $7.87 / US gallon).[3]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_taxes_in_the_United_State...
[2] https://www.finder.com/gas-prices
[3] https://www.globalpetrolprices.com/gasoline_prices/Europe/
OPs point had nothing to do with wether the government subsidised EVs or not.
The original argument was not that they were "leader" but that somehow people were buying Teslas for their quality or being better than everything else.
Second, they are still the leader. The quality arguments are clearly nitpicky since people seem to be buying them in droves anyway.
When Tesla introduced the Model S there were no other electric sedans on the market.
Tesla introduced the Model X in 2015, it’s now 2023 and you still have to wait almost 2 years more if you want Volvo’s competitor to the Model X. Even with all the amazing subsidies Volvo is still a decade late to the party!
I'll try to find the article.
It looks more like technology is <<redistributing>> wealth, which is SUPER scary since technology inherently allows concentration.
Facebook killed 1 million newspapers, yay, now 1 American corporation can siphon all those profits to... no one even knows where, since it's probably parked in some tax haven. It created 10k jobs paid 500k each by killing 10 million jobs each paid 60k. I'm not super convinced the end result is better.
Edit:
https://cs.stanford.edu/people/eroberts/cs201/projects/produ...
> The productivity paradox (also the Solow computer paradox) is the peculiar observation made in business process analysis that, as more investment is made in information technology, worker productivity may go down instead of up. This observation has been firmly supported with empirical evidence from the 1970s to the early 1990s.
He said from the warm comfort of his home, with a full belly, writing on a supercomputer created in SV, with software written in SV, on a platform build by SV on a global network created, of course, by the SV.
Would you give up technology then? Nobody stops you but I seriously doubt the productivity of hand-plowing fields is in any way higher than that of modern farm equipment.
The delta between floor and ceiling does not matter. Lift everyone up, this is not 0 sum.
Yes it does. Relative power is a thing, even in a democracy.
The important stuff absolutely is zero sum. Housing , p**y and bragging rights
Also, what’s the argument for Facebook killing newspapers? Craigslist was siphoning off a main source of newspaper revenue for papers long before Facebook arrived. Would you also argue against the end result of moving on from local classifieds sections?
All that aside, Tesla's approach is to have a few overall form factors and to innovate in software. The hardware is fine and matters a lot less.
The very post that started this discussion says otherwise. Software doesn't get you from A to B on its own.
I thought that was an interesting observation, and I've been reminded of it ever since. Maybe that person was right.
Tesla targets a very narrow range of the car market. It doesn't make much sense for them to have two similar-sized models, because the Venn diagram of "people who want an EV" and "people who want a $SIZE $BODY_STYLE" is already pretty narrow.
Model X price segment competitors: Audi Q8/SQ8 e-tron, BMW iX, Mercedes EQS SUV, Lotus Eletre
There are dozens of EVs with better powertrains and interiors for less money than the S/X. I have merely listed cars with similar MSRPs.
1) No buttons but shit quality touch "areas in places you have to guess" on steering wheel, is straight up dangerous, and incredibly annoying because you can't "get a feel" for anything you have to do, ie. turn lights, wipers etc.
2) No other knobs for sound, climate etc. instead touch screen. Same thing stupid, slow and dangerous.
3) No speedometer, "just look constantly to the right and down" ok now it's getting in to joke territory.
4) Shit interior.
A Renault Zoe cheap mini car is easier in day to day use because of this.
The Tesla UI is the best car UI I've ever used. By far. I would never want to go back.
1. There's zero guessing. The steering wheel touch zones are very nicely marked by bumps. I have never put my finger in the wrong spot. 2. You can configure the steering wheel buttons to do sound/climate/etc. But you're mostly meant to use voice and put everything on auto. 3. Never in my life have I just stared at the speedometer. Why are you staring at it so much? Is something wrong?
Impressive technology, and admirable strides towards their mission, impressive engineers ... but with many failing: FSD, repairability, boring drive-feedback, insurance pricing, focus on speed over alsmost everything, manufacturing quality both inside and outside, and the design language of a taxi-cab to top it all off ... only the S can be considered a decent looking vehicle.
But, above all, once you lose goodwill (via the CEO behaving like a thirsty attention-grabbing idiot) you lose nearly everything. This is what I don't think is factored into their ridiculous company valuation.
Tesla have been both one of the most impressive companies of the last 20 years, and one of the biggest dissapointments (to me).
All that said, I think the Model 3 feels remarkably sporty for how heavy it is. You can feel that weight in corners for sure, but I'd hardly call the ride "numb". I can't accelerate entirely through a typical corner like I can with the STI, but once the weight settles, and you're coming out of a corner, you can make up whatever was lost when scrubbing speed with instant torque. I think because of that, it feels far more like my STI than most all other cars I've driven.
I’m all for innovation, but it just seems like Elon is being a contrarian since none of this improves driving at all. Deep down, it seems like Elon is checking how much he can mess with his loyal base by moving things around and making the driving UX worse. Probably strokes his ego.
I also used to produce music and buttons were always better, more tactile, then comes latency which is another modern problem - imagine a touch piano with 40ms delay, not good.
Someone also mentioned militaries changed back from touch to knobs because you'd never get the same speed and "feel".
I'm convinced the human mammal is simply adapted to use our hands with tools and materials that give good solid, instant feedback with lots of tactility, texture, depth and even sound and we'll hopefully realise this in the UX world.
Regarding the "who even looks at a speedometer" is just bizarre to me as a city/provincial driver also in Scandinavia. You need to look there continuously as speed limits more or less constantly change when driving here; from 30, to 50, then 40, then 80, then 30 and going more than 30% over you can get a huge fine and 1/3 strike to get your license revoked, ie. you actually have to glance quite a bit which i guess is why car manufacturers have put speedometers there for 100 years, isn't this a normal part of driving a car?
Where the f*ck is a HUD in a tesla? That's exactly the kind of car which should be getting cool space-age tech like that.
Elon already went on twitter and said no HUD ever and disparaged people asking for it.
Why did another comment saying basically the same thing get mass downvoted and killed? HUDs are some of the coolest features in cars and tesla refusing to implement it is a deal breaker for a LOT of people in the know.
At worst, it obscures part of your vision. It also causes more eye strain to use, because there's movement in the background compared to a dashboard.
Fighter pilots have been using HUDs for 70 years and in the past 20 years they have become common in airliners as they hugely improve safety in low-visibility operations.
It’s the best thing about my new car and I can’t imagine buying something, other than a track beater, without it in the future.
Without checking speedometer often, how do you know if you're not going above the speed limit?
Anyways, generally plenty of feedback to observe without needing to glue your eyes to a speedometer. Is this not a common thing?
For me, it's the relative silence of going from 0-60 MPH in under 4 seconds that does it. I have an ICE car that can almost do that, but it does so very loudly requires me to shift gears manually as it happens. It's a full body and mind experience, one full of very obvious feedback.
To a degree, but not to the finesse of 10% + 2mph which is the threshold of prosecution in the UK, for example.
Can you tell 20 from 24mph, or 30 from 35mph, without looking?
As with most of the things that people worry about with these, it’s actually not a problem.
I'll reluctantly agree with this notion, but will say that being the best car UI is hardly difficult to achieve.
> There's zero guessing.
What? Do you use the UI every day? I do, and I'm constantly guessing where the latest UI update moved things to.
I suspect my Model 3 doesn't have "touch zones" on the steering wheel either, since if it I did, I'd certainly be touching them unintentionally. Or maybe my Model 3 does have them, and I just haven't found the UI control/setting to know if I do or not.
The configurable steering wheel button is a huge win in terms of usability, and it's also relatively new to the Model 3.
> you're mostly meant to use voice and put everything in auto.
Some of us don't have voices. Being able to speak out loud should not be a requirement for driving a vehicle.
Regarding everything being in auto: when everything is in auto, sometimes the car wants to automatically slam on the brakes or swerve into oncoming traffic or stopped police cars. You may be comfortable with that risk. I am not.
I have also never stared at my speedometer, but that's usually because on most cars it's easy to just glance down and see a speedometer.
On the Model 3, you have to: remember where the speedometer is now (since UI updates have moved it - it's had 4 different locations since I've owned my Tesla). Once you do find it, you have to ignore all the other UI baubles crowding around it. There are dancing grey 3D models of nearby vehicles, notifications, yellow icons, if your blinker is on, and you found the setting to enable it, sometimes a side camera overlay alternating between something you can see and full yellow/white from brightness of the blinker over exposing the shot, green icons, models of nearby vehicles that are swapping out between a truck shape, a sideways car shape, cones, then back into the sedan model (even though the vehicle it's rendering is actually a tiny old pick up trick).
It UI may be the "best car UI" you've ever used, but that doesn't mean touch-screen-only controls in a vehicle are even remotely a good idea.
No. Changes in technology.
Sometimes changes are for the worse.
Just because something changed does not mean it is better.
They still lag somewhat in other areas (drivetrain efficiency, software, ADAS etc.), but to say that a new company can't build cars well is simply just not true.
You must be a 100yr old conglomerate, those companies never do shady things or have failures in quality control.
Tesla is also no longer innovating, they are far behind in almost every way. They lost their lead in battery tech, marketing and assistance features.
They are still innovating. For all of its other drama the Cybertruck has some amazing innovations. It's now a 48V system, uses an ethernet bus, uses un-treated stainless steel, etc.
Again, I'm not remotely claiming the Cybertruck is a great vehicle or that it won't have any problems, but they definitely are still innovating on vehicles.
Marketing? Tesla never really had a marketing department and now doesn't even have a PR department, last I heard.
Its steel body panels alone qualify as both disruptive market and technical innovation. There's exactly nothing else like it.
Did you see Munro's walking tour of the steel fab? The welding of the interiors to their respective body panels is awesome. Just one of dozens of process and technical innovation. Terrific stuff.
Acknowledging caveats about Musk, leadership, working conditions, FSD, yadda yadda aside:
Other manufacturers certainly have noted Cybertruck's reduced part count (BOM) and labor hours. They've gotta be concerned.
Like Apple with the iPhone, Tesla will continue to be more profitable than its competitors. Cheaper cost of capital, pour those profits back into R&D, fly wheel effect, etc.
If you’re one of the 3/20 Tesla 3 owners that have serious faults Teslas innovation isn’t of much value to you.
[0[ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-mu...
It could be that the Shanghai factory is more well run, or it could get experience from the other factories, the model 3 is just 7 years old and before that Tesla was doing more small scale production.
But historically Chinese produced cars are worse than those made in other countries. Toyota, for example, has huge quality problems in China that it didn’t have in US or Japanese produced cars. It would be cool if it is the opposite for Tesla.
Seems like Tesla fails at the core feature of a car.
> Seems like Tesla fails at the core feature of a car.
Thank god the existing manufacturers have this nailed down, like Toyota[0], Dodge [1], Ford[2], Mazda[3], or even high end manufacturers like Lamborghini[4].
[0]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-recalls-new-ev-over-risk...
[1]: https://www.kiro7.com/news/trending/dodge-ram-trucks-recalle...
[2]: https://www.thedrive.com/news/2022-ford-f-150-raptors-recall...
[3]: https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/nation-world/2019/07/03/...
[4]: https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/lamborghini-aventador-sv-...
Tesla = would fall off
Tesla = you talking out of your ass
Basic stuff, impossible for Volkswagen.
EDIT: I agree with the replies that say this should be handled by CarPlay/Android Auto. In which case I’d like my cars software to support that well.
EDIT2: Oh and there has to be an api where the car shares charge state and range estimates with my phone, such that my phone can plan a route around charge stops.
The interface feels smooth as a tablet, and I don't think they've done too many weird customizations. Overall quite pleased.
[1]: https://9to5google.com/2021/09/06/android-automotive-renault...
Unlike Spotify, car radio does not need subscription nor account.
I wouldn't want to have to setups accounts in my car. Also you don't necessarily want the persons who borrow your car to know everythings about you including every single place you have marked as favorite.
The builtin infotainment system is usually just a second thought that exist just to showcase something in the showroom and setup android auto at first use.
That one of the tricks Tesla is figuring out is how to cook the books on these figures.
I drive an ICE Subaru, and I love it. But some friends visited and didn’t tighten the gas cap once, which put the infotainment system into a fit, which put a bunch of other systems into a conniption, systems totally unrelated like ABS. (?!) The issue persisted across restarts and ultimately required servicing.
How was this recorded? User error. In part because there is a dealership between me and the manufacturer that is responsible for servicing the vehicle.
I wouldn’t have linked the two had the dealership not told me that was what caused it.
Also dealerships not having a clue is not rare either. Many garages these days only connect a computer to the diagnostics port, download whatever error codes are shown and tell the shocked driver that half of their car is kaputt with the repair likely going to be several thousands of euro.
All the while the real problem is a blown fuse for one of the control units or a wire has chaffed and broke somewhere - and the diagnostic codes come only because the ECU can't talk to some sensors because part of the vehicle's CAN bus is down.
To me, the car broke. Plainly and simply. And had Tesla had a similar fuckup, I don’t think they’d find sympathy. (Reasonably.) That’s something that comes with a longevity.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38762366
[2] https://www.subaruoutback.org/threads/loose-gas-cap-causes-e...
Yes it should be better documented. I ran into this as well on my Subaru, but once the cap is on proper it -should- turn off within ~1hr of driving (constant or short trips)
To wit; if you don't put AdBlue in a diesel it will eventually outright stop working altogether even though it's only there for emissions.
This is clearly BS, since it was either coincidence or an electrical/systems problem. The shamelessness of making that claim that is incredible.
Some might question that this could be an electrical or systems problem, but the gas cap on my Kia, a relatively flimsy piece of plastic, will disable the car if not replaced properly. How does this manifest itself? With a check engine light on the dash.
This is the most stupendously idiotic misfeature in an otherwise well designed (and reliable) car.
ex. my current car had an intermittent O2 sensor issue, which would turn the traction control in lazy mode and try to kill me in snow/ice conditions by reenabling itself at the worst possible moment when detecting slippery conditions. My previous car had traction controls completely independent from engine faults.
Now, granted, my Subaru has a wonderfully designed interior, doesn't require using a touchscreen, has consistent panel gaps, etc...
Model 3s are not luxury vehicles. By feature set, positioning or price point.
Teslas are priced as luxury cars but they aren't luxury cars. They have strong selling points, like the amazing battery compared to other EVs or their looks (I do find the Model S very nice / sleek) but the quality of the interior/materials and sound proofing simply isn't there, not by a mile.
Here's a list, for example, of some actual luxury cars:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-segment
I was highly disappointed when I went in a Model S: I'm used to actual luxury cars and I simply don't know how to put it nicely: to me a Model S is a complete rip off price-wise.
I'd urge anyone thinking that Tesla is luxury to go in a Mercedes dealership and sit in a class S or go to a Porsche dealership and sit in a Panamera (or in the Taycan 100% EV). That is luxury.
FWIW the Tesla Model S and Porsche Panamera (for example) entry models begin at the same price so it's not apple and orange comparison: that's why I say Tesla is sold as luxury, at the price of luxury, but is not luxury.
Confirmed. Friends in the car maintenance business have witnessed for years a quality fall (materials etc).
"Infotainment", I hope I will not have the experience (apart maybe from removing some), but my last car was the first one with a sound system that hissed.
At a polar opposite, I'm reminded of the wonder of walking across the Brooklyn bridge and thinking, "they don't make them like this anymore".
Althought we did learn a lot about the affects of pressure on the human body which is cool.
Aka petrol/diesel
It's a bummer because with Elon's antics I don't see myself owning another Tesla, but my experience so far has been great.
I guess scale allows you to compensate for years of experience.
Would be interesting to see how they will test your theory in the next few years. My hypothesis is a few chinese brands will be scoring in the top 10% of reliability in the next 5 years.
It does not take a century to match up quality engineering with QA processes than take those inputs and re-make the automation line.
That may be, but Tesla didn't have to rediscover everything from scratch, just like SpaceX didn't have to reinvent rocketry from scratch but rather stood on the shoulders of decades' worth of giants.
Not very conducive to driving product innovation.
Assembly absolutely is manufacturing.
It is just that his highness, greatest pretengineer of recent times, SEC-convicted fraudster, CCP-affiliated (some say owned) dude whilestill holding US security clearances, documented drugster and potentially affiliated too with Mexican cartels, has a strong NIH syndrome, and thinks he's smarter than decades of engineers contributing their discoveries into our human knowledge pool. Constantly overruling the more sensible people still working for him by authoritarian decrees.
Besides, the SEC scandal is pretty small-beer in terms of auto industry scandals - see the VW emissions scandal, the safety scandal of Toyota which is only just kicking off, General Motors ignition switch scandal, going all the way back to the classic defective gas tank scandal from Ford...
What government subsidies has Tesla received to date? Please post links to sources.
[1] https://money.cnn.com/2013/05/22/autos/tesla-loan-repayment/...
[2] https://theweek.com/articles/454749/auto-bailout-officially-...
The discussion is about subsidies not loans or bailouts (which are different things)