Is Tesla A Game Changer?

gagrice

Mr_Shiftright said:

Sounds pretty smart since EVs are much more efficient at lower speeds. I think trying to push EVs to go hundreds of miles using charging stations or battery swaps is a clunky solution.

I cannot imagine stopping every 170 miles to get a half hour recharge. Not to mention finding an open Super Charger that works and is not in use. Anything less than 500 mile range for a road vehicle is a non starter for me.

Mr_Shiftright

I always tell people to think of a Tesla Model S as a Lexus with a 9 gallon gas tank and a soda straw filler neck.

fintail

I wonder what the charging stations are like around Seattle, where Teslas are a dime a dozen. I don't know what would be more irksome, needing to stop in less than 200 miles or being forced to wait in line for a 30 minute (if you are lucky) charge.

But I suspect many if not most have a normal ICE car for trips, and use the EV as a (heavily subsidized, as all 80K+ cars should be) city toy.

Mr_Shiftright

I've only met 3 Tesla owners face to face, and it's not their only car, in each case.

fintail

And I suspect the others aren't exactly fuel misers.

berri

Tesla may have spurred more interest in electric vice diesel longer term, but it has some production and quality glitches. Long term I also wonder if it will have the talent and financial resources to really become a big player in the market or go the way of Tucker.

gagrice

There is one Tesla S in our neighborhood, I see it on a regular basis. I would say at least 75% of luxury vehicles in our village are SUVs. Only one Super Charger in San Diego county. 37.6 miles from our house. Unless you are overbuilt on solar, I see no practical way to own one with electricity at 41 cents per KWH. Average is 3 miles per KWH, or about 14 cents per mile. About a nickel a mile more than my Touareg TDI, with diesel at $2.50 per gallon.

texases

Latest Edmunds X test post is none too positive:
http://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-x/2016/long-term-road-test/2016-tesla-model-x-the-doors-are-dangerous.html

Mr_Shiftright

Stockholder definitely did NOT like Musk's intention to buy Solar City. They declared that they wanted him to "stick to the car business". Stock went down 13%, currrently down 7% and bouncing around.

Mr_Shiftright

texases said:

Latest Edmunds X test post is none too positive:
http://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-x/2016/long-term-road-test/2016-tesla-model-x-the-doors-are-dangerous.html

People warned Tesla that those doors were a dumb idea, but I guess Tesla figured the wow factor was worth the risk.

Apparently not.

gagrice

Mr_Shiftright said:

Stockholder definitely did NOT like Musk's intention to buy Solar City. They declared that they wanted him to "stick to the car business". Stock went down 13%, currrently down 7% and bouncing around.

It looks to me like Musk would save his half a billion in SCTY stock by exchanging for TSLA stock. Solar City has to be on the brink of Bankruptcy. They currently owe 3 times the total value of the company. The Chinese are kicking their butt. Even with the big tariffs. Tesla is down $21+ right now.

For Elon Musk it’s a “no brainer,” but investors were less than certain Tuesday night after the tech magnate announced a $2.8 billion deal for his company Tesla Motors (TSLA) to buy the struggling SolarCity Corp., Musk’s renewable energy company.

Musk said the combined company could benefit from consumer appetites: Why not get your solar panel, electric car and battery pack all at once? But investors punished Tesla’s stock in after-hours trading, unclear as to how the car manufacturer would be affected by SolarCity’s $6.2 billion in debt and other liabilities.

http://www.ibtimes.com/five-stocks-watch-wednesday-tesla-motors-inc-tsla-solarcity-corp-scty-adobe-systems-2385350

Mr_Shiftright

Gotta say, this guy has guts.

berri

I'm still wondering longer term if "Tucker" will apply???

Mr_Shiftright

Maybe, hard to say. Tucker was a real big mouth and PO'ed a lot of powerful people Musk seems way too smart for that.

fintail

Musk is also very wealthy (and has a cult of devoted followers behind him), Tucker not nearly so much. That helps a lot.

explorerx4

This weekend we are getting together with some friends who have one of their kids that works for SCTY(HQ not installer).
Not sure if I should bring it up or not.

berri

Musk may be wealthy, how much in liquid assets not sure. But there seems to maybe be a bit of possible cash maneuvering with the solar and Tesla companies. It will be interesting to follow this in the WSJ. But the big risk is although he may be wealthy, other big auto companies are putting a lot of dough into electric and they don't have all the infrastructure costs to ramp up if the market goes that way, and they have dealerships so they don't face all the various state law complications they may restrain Tesla's ability to sell large volume. Actually, that brings up another issue. The auto industry would like to reduce dealer inventories to increase cost efficiencies, but buyers don't want to wait for special orders, they want the new car now. Tesla is a bit of a novelty right now, but if electric goes big and the players multiply, will his marketing distribution plan still work?

Mr_Shiftright

Nissan will soon introduce a new Leaf with a range of 200 miles, which puts it square in the face of the Model 3 and even the base Model S. If the Leaf is introduced before the Model 3, that is going to hurt Tesla, no doubt. Also, the Leaf concept car is rather stunning.

stever

That would triple their real world range, assuming that 200 miles is a "real" number. In print, it's going from 107 miles to 200.

The Leaf has been out since 2011, so doubling range in 5 years - well, seems like progress should be a bit faster.

Durn stalled out battery progress.

Mr_Shiftright

It's not just about range though, it's about people's expectations about what equipment the car should have. I bet the new car is heavier than the old. Everything seems to be getting porkier these days.

Michaell

What about the Bolt? Serious competitor to the Leaf?

Mr_Shiftright

Sure, very serious competitor.

fintail

That's the key, when established makers who have much more experience get their EVs up and running - and we all know they are coming. Tesla is no doubt working on developing a cult now before the competition arrives (and the dopey tax break finally expires).

berri said:

Musk may be wealthy, how much in liquid assets not sure. But there seems to maybe be a bit of possible cash maneuvering with the solar and Tesla companies. It will be interesting to follow this in the WSJ. But the big risk is although he may be wealthy, other big auto companies are putting a lot of dough into electric and they don't have all the infrastructure costs to ramp up if the market goes that way, and they have dealerships so they don't face all the various state law complications they may restrain Tesla's ability to sell large volume. Actually, that brings up another issue. The auto industry would like to reduce dealer inventories to increase cost efficiencies, but buyers don't want to wait for special orders, they want the new car now. Tesla is a bit of a novelty right now, but if electric goes big and the players multiply, will his marketing distribution plan still work?

gagrice

The established auto makers are way ahead of Tesla in Norway. The country that practically pays you to buy a plug in vehicle. Looks like Mitsubishi hit the sweet spot last month in Norway. VW has 4 out of the top ten sellers. Toyota Prius PHEV did not sell any. Only 3 this year.

http://evobsession.com/norways-sales-figures-may-2016-show-move-towards-phevs/

hpmctorque

More evidence of serious competition ahead for Tesla...

http://autoweek.com/article/green-cars/mercedes-launch-electric-car-sub-brand-paris-motor-show-report-says

fintail

300+ mile range and might not look like an egg. Bring it on.

Michaell

fintail said:

300+ mile range and might not look like an egg. Bring it on.

What I like is that it will share parts and factories with existing cars; makes it easier to design and build - and, hopefully, keep the price down.

andres3

Google Cars finally has an at-fault accident on its record.

stever

The police report failed to mention that the car was sexting a red Miata in the cross-street.

berri

Funny - but artificial intelligence in play???

stever

Maybe a case of GIGO.

berri

C'mon Stever; yeah its a Miata, but a sexy roadster doesn't always have to be Italian

stever

Should have said it was a Fiat 124 Spider but my brain doesn't engage fast enough sometimes all too often.

hpmctorque

Nissan seems to agree with Shifty regarding the Volt's technology...

http://www.autonews.com/article/20160625/OEM05/306279981/nissans-to-do-list-range-autonomy

Mr_Shiftright

Well Tesla has fulfilled 1 of the 3 of "my" requirements for a fully functional and truly successful EV.

1. The car has to look like and perform like a real, comfortable, serious automobile. No 3 wheelers, no tandem seating, no goofy "bubbleness", no trick doors, no tiny tires, no golf cart switchgear, etc.

2. The range has to match or exceed 300 miles in all normal weather conditions and operating conditions

3. The price has to be a "sweet spot" somewhere in the $22K-$32K range in order to enter the mass market.

hpmctorque

The Chevy Volt seems to fulfill those three requirements, including #3, after the tax break.

I think that the Volt architecture may be the best EV compromise until there's a breakthrough in battery technology. However, with gasoline prices where they are now, or even a little higher, pure ICEs remain the best value proposition.

I wonder how effectively the Volt's architecture would work for a full-size SUV or pickup. Any thoughts on why hybrid technology, other than some GM offerings with mild hybrids, hasn't been applied to larger non-commercial vehicles?

Mr_Shiftright

I don't think the Volt qualifies because it's not a pure EV---I was thinking of those criteria strictly for EVs. So far, nobody's done it.

Maybe a small hybrid pickup would work but building a big one with enough "grunt" might get awfully expensive. Also I'm not sure how battery packs would like all that pounding.

texases

While it's just one X, it can't be good publicity:
http://jalopnik.com/owner-dumps-tesla-model-x-over-quality-problems-1782709020

Mr_Shiftright

I just learned something the other day about Tesla "Auto Pilot". If you're in traffic say, and there's no car ahead of you, when the light turns red, Auto Pilot will blow right through it.

stever

Red light running - gee, I hate it when the software programmers go too far in imitating real life.

Mr_Shiftright

Yeah, redundant technology---LOL!

stever

Bet the default for the turn signals is "off" too.

fintail

I think that's a setting available in the Seattle area.

texases

Well this isn't good:
http://jalopnik.com/first-fatal-tesla-autopilot-crash-sparks-nhtsa-investig-1782916450

fintail

At the very least, the "Autopilot" name needs to be dropped. Just for a silly reason, like because it isn't actually an autopilot and all.

That PR/marketing/damage control statement by Tesla is cringeworthy, not just for the debatable cherry-picked stats (just like their lease claims, hmmm), and distancing themselves and trying to set the tone already, gubbamint regulators adore that kind of thing. They really think they can do no wrong.

berri

But I read that the truck apparently made an illegal left turn in front of the Tesla, so it will be complicated legally.

texases

That's the problem with autopilots. If they can't handle emergency situations they're no good. Even if a person might do no better people want the chance to do better. 

berri

I think an issue is that people tend to equate autopilot with hands free, I can do something else driving. But like autopilot in flying, the answer is more like cruise control. You still have to have your head in the game. Human factors are always at play in life.

gagrice

autopilot on an airplane gives you plenty of warning when something is wrong. When you are driving 70 MPG 100 feet or less from someone else I want control, even if I am slower than a computer. I really cannot believe the Federal government is allowing autopilot. Warning systems are fine.

berri

Not always or for everything - you plug in a wrong digit, sudden mechanical issue, unexpected turbulence, the system hiccups, and so on. But yes, it is fairly advanced. However it still requires human factors and interface, and flying is three dimensional and more complex than driving, with frequently faster required reaction times. I don't think cars will ever be able to afford the extent of aircraft systems, even with costs coming down. I also don't think it will ever be realistic to expect a car to handle everything for you while you read the newspaper. Same with an aircraft. For that matter, you can't set and forget a drone either. I totally agree with your hands on the control and head in the game approach. Btw, there was recently an article somewhere that I read talking about false alarms on various auto makes regarding inappropriate sudden braking or course correction because of computer misinterpretation in the automation , often triggered by light issues that mislead the camera and computer. IIRC it has occurred on several Toyota and Ford systems, and is probably not limited to just those makes. So these system developers and car companies shouldn't be over promising IMHO.