Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 08-02-2017, 09:36 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
if the high end charger requires 75 amp service then a separate box is required which is not the problem. the charger is expensive enough that the cost of adding another box is just part of the budget. The problem is the inability to service even a small fraction of the increase in power consumption in many locations.

THAT's a problem. Of course the consumer can just buy a generator that runs on natural gas but the co2 levels will probably go up.

If we know how many of the cars will sell in California then it should be easy to calculate the net increase in power consumption and the savings in co2.

Last edited by Magiver; 08-02-2017 at 09:36 PM.
  #52  
Old 08-02-2017, 09:38 PM
Chimera is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Dreaming
Posts: 24,398
So let's see a BC Hydro (water power) exec disses electric cars and renewable energy. Isn't that like asking an oil exec for his opinion of the same?

I've never heard the wild claim about not being able to have 3 cars on the same block charging up. Sounds like unadulterated bullshit. Lol, from a Straight Dope archived thread I found through Google: "Typically, in an urban area, tower power transmission lines are 100,000 volts at 1000 amps." (User name: Ice Wolf) Also, larger houses these days are sometimes equipped with 200 amp service. I seriously doubt that a neighborhood of McMansions is going to suffer regular brownouts on hot days or when they're all partying because of power draw. But I'm sure we have dopers on board who can explain this better.

The whole Chevy Volt thing *is* unadulterated bullshit. You wouldn't bother to recharge the battery on a long drive, you'd stick to the gas engine.
  #53  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:02 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):
It's almost entirely nonsense.

You don't need 75 amps for a Tesla charger. The Tesla needs about 0.3 kW-h/mi, and the average American drives 12k miles per year. That comes to 10 kW-h/day. If you charge for 12 hours while home, that comes to an average of 7 amps. Less than a typical hair dryer. A Tesla has more than enough capacity to smooth out typical daily fluctuations.

It does not take 10 hours to charge a Tesla at a Supercharger, which are along all the major routes and increasing over time. They will charge 170 miles in 30 min, which increases trip time by perhaps 25%.

I don't know where the author lives but $1.16/kW-h is ridiculous. I have a hard time believing anyone pays that much, even on time-of-day plans at peak hours. Most electric companies have electric car plans that give discounts for nighttime charging; $0.05-$0.10/kW-h is more likely for these plans.
  #54  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:05 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
I seriously doubt that a neighborhood of McMansions is going to suffer regular brownouts on hot days or when they're all partying because of power draw. But I'm sure we have dopers on board who can explain this better.
.
It doesn't matter if it's a McMansion or a tent. The electricity comes from the same source. Either there is excess capacity to handle the additional load or there isn't.

California currently has a surplus capacity of 21% going into 2020 which should work out nicely in the ramp up of electric cars.

Last edited by Magiver; 08-02-2017 at 10:06 PM.
  #55  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:07 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Here's a poll on the subject. 81% say they don't like it.
A poll on a Mac tech support forum from 2009, asking in the context of cars without any kind of self-driving, and largely answered by people who have never driven a car with a center speedo. That's really... convincing.

The few reports from people that have drive a Model 3 have said it's not a problem and the increased visibility is nice. I'll take their opinions over random Mac users from 2009.
  #56  
Old 08-02-2017, 11:02 PM
Spiderman's Avatar
Spiderman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: somewhere East of there
Posts: 10,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by YamatoTwinkie View Post
There are two current supercharger stations between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, one in Harrisburg, the other in Somerset. Shouldn't be more than 30 minutes of extra time tacked onto the current trip to allow for charging, but that's assuming you'll have some sort of charging available at your destination.
How many chargers are at each station? I've hardly ever seen a gas station with less than four pumps & some have 20 or more. At 3-4 minutes a fill, that's a pretty short line to wait in on the rare times I do need to wait. Do they have a take-a-number system like at the deli counter or a pager like some chain restaurants do when your table is ready so that I can at least go in & have a meal while waiting or do I need to stay with my car so that someone else doesn't jump in while I'm inside?


Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it.
Electricity doesn't come out of thin air either. What's the cost to the environment if it's produced in a coal or nuclear plant vs. ICE engine in a car spewing exhaust? I've never seen those figures anywhere. Just because it's pushed up the chain doesn't mean it's really zero-emissions.
  #57  
Old 08-02-2017, 11:14 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
How many chargers are at each station?
It varies, but on the order of a dozen is common. Most of them are not so busy that you can't find an open slot. Some--mostly the ones you don't want to use anyway (because they are in urban centers instead of on the highway)--can get very busy, and they'll have a line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
What's the cost to the environment if it's produced in a coal or nuclear plant vs. ICE engine in a car spewing exhaust?
If the electricity comes purely from coal, a Tesla is about equivalent to a decent hybrid--in the ballpark of 50 mpg, IIRC. A decent mix of even natural gas reduces the equivalent CO2 output considerably, and of course hydroelectric, nuclear, solar and wind do better yet. Considering the overall mix of US electricity, Teslas are equivalent to >100 mpg.

One of the major benefits of electric cars is that they benefit automatically from improvements in generation. Install some solar panels on your house and your car has automatically gotten more efficient.
  #58  
Old 08-03-2017, 08:26 AM
Balthisar is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Southeast Michigan, USA
Posts: 11,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
...a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service.
That's your choice. With 220 service, you have home charging options from 60 amps down, and 110 VAC options, too. There’s no requirement.

Quote:
Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors … and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.
It would seem that the Volt really sucks, then. I’ve talked to Volt owners in real life, though, and their experience isn’t like this at all. As a then-user of a Fusion Energi, I was always a bit envious that Volt owners got 45 to 50 miles before the switch to gasoline, whereas I got from 15 (when freezing or colder) to 25 miles. On pure gasoline, my gas-only mileage was about 44 mph, and this was on the freeway (never needed fuel for local trips or commuting).

Quote:
According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity.
All other things being equal, it proves why a Volt should get about double the electric range of my 7 kwh Fusion.

Quote:
The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery.
I’d like to know where in the country this dude lives. A kwh of energy is less than 15 cents in most of the country, and about 12 cents here, including distribution. If you take a peak rate plan and charge at night, then you can conceivably charge at half this rate at night.

Quote:
So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
It’s all FUD.
  #59  
Old 08-03-2017, 08:52 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):

Subject: Gas vs Electric Automobiles

ELECTRIC CAR...Hmmm... It makes you wonder…

Ever since the advent of electric cars, the REAL cost per mile of those things has never been discussed. All you ever heard was the mpg in terms of gasoline, with nary a mention of the cost of electricity to run it. This is the first article I’ve ever seen and tells the story pretty much as I expected it to.

Electricity has to be one of the least efficient ways to power things yet they’re being shoved down our throats… Glad somebody finally put engineering and math to paper.

At a neighborhood BBQ I was talking to a neighbor, a BC Hydro executive. I asked him how that renewable thing was doing. He laughed, then got serious. If you really intend to adopt electric vehicles, he pointed out, you had to face certain realities. For example, a home charging system for a Tesla requires 75 amp service. The average house is equipped with 100 amp service. On our small street (approximately 25 homes), the electrical infrastructure would be unable to carry more than 3 houses with a single Tesla, each. For even half the homes to have electric vehicles, the system would be wildly over-loaded.

This is the elephant in the room with electric vehicles... Our residential infrastructure cannot bear the load. So as our genius elected officials promote this nonsense, not only are we being urged to buy these things and replace our reliable, cheap generating systems with expensive, new windmills and solar cells, but we will also have to renovate our entire delivery system! This latter "investment" will not be revealed until we're so far down this dead end road that it will be presented with an 'OOPS!' and a shrug.

If you want to argue with a green person over cars that are eco-friendly, just read the following. Note: If you ARE a green person, read it anyway. It’s enlightening.

Eric test drove the Chevy Volt at the invitation of General Motors … and he writes, "For four days in a row, the fully charged battery lasted only 25 miles before the Volt switched to the reserve gasoline engine.” Eric calculated the car got 30 mpg including the 25 miles it ran on the battery. So, the range including the 9-gallon gas tank and the 16 kwh battery is approximately 270 miles.

It will take you 4-1/2 hours to drive 270 miles at 60 mph. Then add 10 hours to charge the battery and you have a total trip time of 14.5 hours. In a typical road trip your average speed (including charging time) would be 20 mph.

According to General Motors, the Volt battery holds 16 kwh of electricity. It takes a full 10 hours to charge a drained battery. The cost for the electricity to charge the Volt is never mentioned so I looked up what I pay for electricity. I pay approximately (it varies with amount used and the seasons) $1.16 per kwh. 16 kwh x $1.16 per kwh = $18.56 to charge the battery. $18.56 per charge divided by 25 miles = $0.74 per mile to operate the Volt using the battery. Compare this to a similar size car with a gasoline engine that gets only 32 mpg. $3.19 per gallon divided by 32 mpg = $0.10 per mile.

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000+… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
Here are the raw numbers for my Bolt: I had a 30-amp, 240V charger installed. The car's battery nominally holds 60 kWh. Nominal mileage rate is 4mi/kWh. Those are all numbers from spec sheets. My night-time electric rate is 0.08$/kWh.

Doing some calculations: nominal complete recharge in 8.3 hours (actual is closer to 10 hours). Nominal mileage recharge rate is 28.8 mph (actual closer to 25 mph). Nominal cost to fully charge is $4.80 (actual closer to $6.00). Nominal marginal cost per mile is 0.02$/mi (actual closer to 0.025$/mi). Nominal numbers are based on the spec sheet; actual numbers are based on mine experience.

I haven't included service costs. Electric cars don't need serviced as much as liquid-fueled cars. Just things like rotating tires, topping off windshield fluid, replacing cabin air filters. Brake pads last a lot longer, because almost braking is done via regenerative with the electric motor instead of the friction. No oil changes, of course. No engine air filters.
  #60  
Old 08-03-2017, 09:01 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
Do they have a take-a-number system like at the deli counter or a pager like some chain restaurants do when your table is ready so that I can at least go in & have a meal while waiting or do I need to stay with my car so that someone else doesn't jump in while I'm inside?
I have no experience with Tesla-network chargers. But other charging networks let you check-in to a charging terminal to claim your spot in line. You'll get a text and/or email when it's your turn. No one else will be allowed to charge in that spot. You get something like 15 minutes to plug in once it's your turn. Usually a cluster of terminals will share the same queue. So if there's eight chargers and you're next, whenever any of the chargers opens up, it's yours.
  #61  
Old 08-03-2017, 10:14 AM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
How many chargers are at each station? I've hardly ever seen a gas station with less than four pumps & some have 20 or more. At 3-4 minutes a fill, that's a pretty short line to wait in on the rare times I do need to wait. Do they have a take-a-number system like at the deli counter or a pager like some chain restaurants do when your table is ready so that I can at least go in & have a meal while waiting or do I need to stay with my car so that someone else doesn't jump in while I'm inside?
TheHarrisburg station mentioned above has 8 superchargers, Somerset has 6.

From what I know, most superchargers rarely get more than 1/2 full, with the exception of a few high traffic locations in California, especially during holiday weekends. Once the model 3 starts ramping up, all the superchargers are obviously going to see a lot more congestion, which is why Tesla has stated that they're planning on doubling their supercharger network within a year. I'm personally skeptical that they can keep up with demand, but hopefully converting from the currently free charging system to a pay-by-the-drink method will discourage abuse of the chargers.

Right now it seems like you just wait in a queue until there's a spot available. With future autonomy, you'd just have your car drop you off and get it to charge itself, then come back an pick you up, but that depends on how much you believe Musk's rather optimistic timeline for self-driving capabilities.
  #62  
Old 08-03-2017, 10:35 AM
scr4 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by YamatoTwinkie View Post
Once the model 3 starts ramping up, all the superchargers are obviously going to see a lot more congestion,
Maybe not much - don't the Model S and X get to use superchargers for free, while Model-3 owners have to pay for their use?
  #63  
Old 08-03-2017, 10:37 AM
Doubticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South-West
Posts: 423
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
Does any of this ring true to anyone (passed along email from my Dad):

Subject: Gas vs Electric Automobiles

The gasoline powered car costs about $20,000 while the Volt costs $46,000+… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
Volt owner here so I can shed some light on this. $46k is what the Volt used to cost, now they vary between $35k and $38k, and that is before the $7,500 rebate. I personally don't buy cars new because of how fast they depreciate. I bought my 2012 Volt for $18K with 30,000 miles on it, not a stripped down one either, it has all the options.

25 miles on a charge is a worst case scenario (maybe driving over 80mph with the heater on full). I average about 35 miles on a charge. It worth noting that the new Volts get 54 miles on a charge. Like the others have said, I only charge the car overnight and on long trips I use gas like normal. As such I'm averaging 138 mpg. It cost me about 50 cents to charge my Volt overnight to get 35 miles of range. As you said that electricity has to come from somewhere. The Union of Concern Scientists published a map that shows how much CO2 released by charging an electric vehicle relative to where they charge. In most cases the worst is equivalent to a car getting 35 mpg, and in some places better than 85 mpg. In my area I have a rating of 52 mpg, but I offset half my energy consumption with solar.
See: http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/c...y#.WYNC84jyuUk
  #64  
Old 08-03-2017, 11:28 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiderman View Post
Electricity doesn't come out of thin air either. What's the cost to the environment if it's produced in a coal or nuclear plant vs. ICE engine in a car spewing exhaust? I've never seen those figures anywhere. Just because it's pushed up the chain doesn't mean it's really zero-emissions.
There's been quite a few studies on your question, with each study taking a slightly different approach. I think the most straightforward question is: if an electric car uses "x" amounts of electricity, and that electricity has a certain impact on the environment, how efficient does a conventional car have to be to produce the same impact on the environment?

http://blog.ucsusa.org/rachael-neale...-emissions-953

So basically, once you include the environmental impact of batteries and stuff that go into electric cars, and make similar calculations for conventional cars, the nationwide average is that an electric car has a similar environmental impact as a conventional car that gets 68 mpg. In certain regions that have cleaner electric power, that mpg number goes up; in other regions with more coal or petroleum use for electricity, that number goes down.

So if you compare a Model 3 to the BMW 3 series or Audi A4s, we could expect the environmental impact of the Tesla to be roughly half of its conventional competition.
  #65  
Old 08-03-2017, 12:06 PM
FinsToTheLeft is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimera View Post
So let's see a BC Hydro (water power) exec disses electric cars and renewable energy. Isn't that like asking an oil exec for his opinion of the same?
Hydro is just a Canadian term for electricity, since that was the original power source in most provinces. In Ontario, the provincially owned generation company used to be called Ontario Hydro. When they split up transmission and generation, we ended up with Hydro One and Ontario Power Generation.

My local provider is owned by the City of Toronto, called Toronto Hydro. According to https://www.cns-snc.ca/media/ontario...ectricity.html our current mix is about 58% nuclear, 25% hydro, 14% gas with the balance being solar, wind, and biofuel.
  #66  
Old 08-03-2017, 09:05 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
A poll on a Mac tech support forum from 2009, asking in the context of cars without any kind of self-driving, and largely answered by people who have never driven a car with a center speedo. That's really... convincing.

The few reports from people that have drive a Model 3 have said it's not a problem and the increased visibility is nice. I'll take their opinions over random Mac users from 2009.
Yes, it is convincing because it's a poll of a group of people versus your singular opinion of a car you threw money down on sight unseen.

I don't now where you get increased visibility with the Model 3 but we're specifically discussing the inherent problem involved with a display that's offset from the driver's forward vision. You can't read the words "the straight dope" at the top of your computer screen while reading this sentence because it's out of your visual range. That's not an opinion.
  #67  
Old 08-04-2017, 03:37 AM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
I can only see my speedometer properly if:
- I'm going straight
- I don't have my hand at the 11-1 o'clock position

Also, I can only get the vaguest sense of my speed in my peripheral vision--vague enough to be worse than my innate sense. Actually reading my speed to within 2 mph requires looking directly at it and ~1/2 second to refocus.

The offset display is never blocked by an arm or the wheel, and is large enough that it probably doesn't require a total refocus. It may actually be readable purely from peripheral vision, unlike the gauge where any kind of precision requires looking at exactly which tick it landed on. I tried some experiments on my computer and there's definitely a size threshold where I can easily read a 2-digit number out of the corner of my eye; it remains to be seen if the speed is that large but I suspect Tesla will do the right thing.

As for the money, the worst-case scenario is that I give Tesla an interest-free $1k loan for about 1.5 years. I get it back if I cancel. Not exactly gonna break the bank.
  #68  
Old 08-04-2017, 07:01 AM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Yes, it is convincing because it's a poll of a group of people versus your singular opinion of a car you threw money down on sight unseen.
There's no doubt that center speedos are polarizing, but your first post on this made it out like it is a threat. There are 6 million Priuses on the road with center speedos, and it has the lowest rate of accidental deaths in its class.

http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Dr...sr5001_emb.pdf

If you don't like it, fine. I'm not really a fan either. Just don't exaggerate so much.
  #69  
Old 08-04-2017, 08:26 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,230
One other benefit of center display - anyone in the passenger seat can easily tell how fast you're going and let you know about it. Wait, is that a benefit?


"oh, yeah it only looks like I'm going that fast because of your angle"
  #70  
Old 08-04-2017, 08:52 AM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magiver View Post
Yes, it is convincing because it's a poll of a group of people versus your singular opinion of a car you threw money down on sight unseen.

I don't now where you get increased visibility with the Model 3 but we're specifically discussing the inherent problem involved with a display that's offset from the driver's forward vision. You can't read the words "the straight dope" at the top of your computer screen while reading this sentence because it's out of your visual range. That's not an opinion.
I'm not sure how this proves your point. If anything it argues for the opposite - the vertical angle between the words "the straight dope" at the top of the computer screen relative to this comment is about the same angle that you'd have between concentrating on a car ahead and a standard speedometer location below it. Next time you get in your car, try looking straight ahead, concentrating on the road, and then glean how much of your speedometer you can pick up in your peripheral vision without moving your eyes. I can tell you how much I can see with my speedometer in the "standard" location - none. I have to glance down to look at the speedometer, then back up at the road.

The model3 has speed information in large font size on the upper left corner of the display, which places it immediately to the upper right of the steering wheel. I'd have to sit in the driver's seat to really know, but it's probably close to a wash in terms of visibility, at least relative to my current car. It may even be better, due to the font size.
  #71  
Old 08-04-2017, 03:17 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
One other benefit of center display - anyone in the passenger seat can easily tell how fast you're going and let you know about it. Wait, is that a benefit?
Been like that for a while. Every passenger with a smart phone knows how fast you're going--usually with greater precision than the driver, in fact .
  #72  
Old 08-06-2017, 11:00 PM
The Niply Elder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoieGrasIsEvil View Post
… So the American Government wants loyal Americans not to do the math, but simply pay three times as much for a car, that costs more than seven times as much to run, and takes three times longer to drive across the country!
[/I]
The irony factor in this post burns.
  #73  
Old 08-10-2017, 09:24 AM
YamatoTwinkie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
Supposedly the Model 3 has improved things over the S/X, including such features as door pockets, but I haven't yet seen a full rundown of the interior amenities. If it has two real cupholders I'll consider it a big improvement .
This video from a test ride at the delivery event goes over a lot of the interior features. 4 cupholders, two in the front in the center console, and 2 in the back on the pull-down center armrest. Door pockets that look shaped to fit a water bottle. Coathooks, individual rear reading lamps, etc. Some stuff that was "missing" from the S/X.
  #74  
Old 08-10-2017, 08:08 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by YamatoTwinkie View Post
This video from a test ride at the delivery event goes over a lot of the interior features. 4 cupholders, two in the front in the center console, and 2 in the back on the pull-down center armrest. Door pockets that look shaped to fit a water bottle. Coathooks, individual rear reading lamps, etc. Some stuff that was "missing" from the S/X.
you left e out the glove compartment and adjustable mirrors. Motor Trend said it all, it is the most important vehicle of the century. I mean, coat hooks AND a glove compartment. I was a little confused about the windshield wipers. The stalk on the column gives you one swipe but you have to use the display to run it?

At some point in the near future we're going to be reading about people unconsciously grabbing the display for support and snapping it off or cracking it.
  #75  
Old 08-10-2017, 08:51 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
The Model S/X had adjustable mirrors and a glove box.

I'm curious how the software will end up, but I anticipate they'll use the steering wheel scroll wheels for a number of things, like wiper speed, sound volume, climate control, etc. A touch-only button for the glovebox seems ok to me. Probably shouldn't be digging around in there while driving anyway...
  #76  
Old 08-10-2017, 10:01 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
The Model S/X had adjustable mirrors and a glove box.

I'm curious how the software will end up, but I anticipate they'll use the steering wheel scroll wheels for a number of things, like wiper speed, sound volume, climate control, etc. A touch-only button for the glovebox seems ok to me. Probably shouldn't be digging around in there while driving anyway...
Everything controlled from a central processor is the general direction automakers have been taking for years. It means they can build cars with only 1 windshield wiper motor for both wipers and use it on every model. It greatly reduces design costs. I suppose someone will come up with a stick-on set of switches that blue tooth into the computer.
  #77  
Old 08-10-2017, 10:07 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
As a point of comparison, the wiring harness on the Model 3 is 1.5 km, while on the Model S it's a 3 km. Probably a huge chunk of that is a direct result of reducing the button count. They want to reduce it to 100 m on the Model Y; they can probably achieve that if the whole system is based on digital comms and power. And they'll probably want to reduce the power wires by using a high voltage (36 v) system.
  #78  
Old 08-10-2017, 10:08 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
the steering wheel control wheels are the auto version of the track ball.
  #79  
Old 08-10-2017, 10:45 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
I don't quite get the analogy, but a lot of people liked trackballs despite them never quite taking off. If anything, I see it more like trackpads, which have more or less taken over given that laptops outsell desktops. They aren't superior to mice in every way, but they certainly have a form factor advantage and are good enough for most purposes.

In other news, the EPA report for the Model 3 is available. It has some interesting tidbits, such a that they're now using permanent magnet motors (the S/X used induction motors), and that the long range model has a max energy capacity of ~80 kW-h.

I've heard through the grapevine that the Model 3 motors are a big improvement over previous ones, and I guess they finally decided that permanent magnets are overall superior to induction. There's a set of tradeoffs but apparently PM is relatively higher efficiency at high speed, which is where the car is least efficient to start with.
  #80  
Old 08-11-2017, 09:06 AM
Pleonast's Avatar
Pleonast is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 7,103
How soon until we have "fly by wire" in cars?
  #81  
Old 08-11-2017, 06:46 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleonast View Post
How soon until we have "fly by wire" in cars?
depending on how you define it we're already there. many of the controls that you think are directly operating the car are actually talking to a computer.
  #82  
Old 08-11-2017, 06:57 PM
Magiver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Dayton Ohio USA
Posts: 28,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
I don't quite get the analogy, but a lot of people liked trackballs despite them never quite taking off. If anything, I see it more like trackpads, which have more or less taken over given that laptops outsell desktops. They aren't superior to mice in every way, but they certainly have a form factor advantage and are good enough for most purposes.
call it whatever you want but it's a user-friendly control thingy for the computer. 2 is better than 1.
  #83  
Old 08-11-2017, 08:14 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
I'm not sure what your point is, then. The common functions can be controlled via the multi-function steering wheel controls and the touchscreen. The less common controls will be touchscreen only. Seat position, mirrors, air vents, and perhaps a couple other things will be profiled. Some stuff will be voice-activated, though I personally wouldn't depend on that too much.
  #84  
Old 08-13-2017, 04:05 PM
ratatoskK is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Beyond the Pale
Posts: 4,159
I'm on the list for a model 3, but I live on the east coast, so by the time they start delivering here, there may be other options. On the other hand, one of the (faraway-ish) places I drive to has a supercharging station, so that's a consideration.
  #85  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:16 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,781
So an update is in order: this summer, one analyst expected that Tesla would deliver 83,000 Model 3s this year, based on hitting 5,000 cars per week in October. Link.

Thus far, Telsa is averging 120 cars per month. Link.

I'm very much rooting for Tesla, and I may consider a Model 3 for my next car in a few years. But let's get this straight: no Elon Musk prediction should be given very much mind. I'm undecided as to whether he sets outrageous goals (aka "lies") to motivate his workforce, in that "beatings will continue until morale improves" theory of management; or if he's just poorly informed as to how his businesses are performing.
  #86  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:45 PM
jz78817 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
So an update is in order: this summer, one analyst expected that Tesla would deliver 83,000 Model 3s this year, based on hitting 5,000 cars per week in October. Link.

Thus far, Telsa is averging 120 cars per month. Link.

I'm very much rooting for Tesla, and I may consider a Model 3 for my next car in a few years. But let's get this straight: no Elon Musk prediction should be given very much mind. I'm undecided as to whether he sets outrageous goals (aka "lies") to motivate his workforce, in that "beatings will continue until morale improves" theory of management; or if he's just poorly informed as to how his businesses are performing.
I honestly think he believes you can build cars like writing software. if schedules slip, throw bodies and hours at the problem.

unfortunately not the case. There are things which have to be done before other things can start, and those things take time.

Tesla is trying to get a baby in one month via 9 women.
  #87  
Old 10-31-2017, 03:59 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
So an update is in order: this summer, one analyst expected that Tesla would deliver 83,000 Model 3s this year, based on hitting 5,000 cars per week in October. Link.
How exactly is Tesla responsible for hitting targets estimated by a random blogger? 83,000 units in 2017 is way out of line with anything Tesla said. Here's an actual quote from Tesla:
Quote:
Our Model 3 program is on track to start limited vehicle production in July and to steadily ramp production to exceed 5,000 vehicles per week at some point in the fourth quarter and 10,000 vehicles per week at some point in 2018.
Somehow, the blogger went from "5k per week sometime in the 4th quarter" to "5k per week in September and more from then on".

Tesla is definitely a little behind on their ramp, but this Ben Sullins guy isn't a professional analyst and certainly not a Tesla spokesperson; he's a YouTube fanboy blogger.
  #88  
Old 11-01-2017, 04:52 PM
Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 21,777
Tesla tanking?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...cid=spartandhp
  #89  
Old 11-01-2017, 05:14 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatopescado View Post
No.

Still up 70% over the past 12 months. Which is absurd and probably not justified even if they were on schedule to hit production targets. It may drop some but it will stay sizably above where it was a year ago and running year on year still keep numbers outperforming the market overall, even after a sizable correction.

Once they start producing they will very likely sell as many of them as they can make as fast as they can make them. The Bolt is doing well, now up to almost 2800 vehicles sold in a month, but that's nothing compared to the pent up demand for the new Tesla.
  #90  
Old 11-01-2017, 06:37 PM
jz78817 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
No.

Still up 70% over the past 12 months. Which is absurd and probably not justified even if they were on schedule to hit production targets. It may drop some but it will stay sizably above where it was a year ago and running year on year still keep numbers outperforming the market overall, even after a sizable correction.
Sooner or later all of those people who are buying TSLA at its current high share price are going to want to realize a return on their investment. A company (especially a manufacturing company) is far more than its share price.

Quote:
Once they start producing they will very likely sell as many of them as they can make as fast as they can make them. The Bolt is doing well, now up to almost 2800 vehicles sold in a month, but that's nothing compared to the pent up demand for the new Tesla.
and even with GM's decades of experience and economies of scale (e.g. building it in an existing plant alongside other models) they're supposedly still losing money on the Bolt.
  #91  
Old 11-01-2017, 07:18 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 11,693
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
Once they start producing they will very likely sell as many of them as they can make as fast as they can make them.
Tesla will definitely sell every Model 3 they can manufacture. The question is whether they can manufacture enough of them quickly enough to avoid disaster.

Tesla is currently losing about $1.5 billion a year, and has reserves of $3.5. That gives them two years or so of runway before they need to start turning a profit or get more funding. They expect their margin to be about 15% going forward, and model 3s are selling for around $50k right now, but are supposed to eventually be $35k or so (I think most of the people who reserved one expect to pay the lower price. So they need to sell between 200,000 and 300,000 Model 3s a year to break even.

Yeah, if they actually hit 5000 vehicles a week in the first part of 2018 and ramp to 10,000 a week later in the year, then great. But if they delay again, and we hit the end of 2018 with average production for the year more like 1000-2000 a week, they'll have sold every car they could make and still be headed towards bankruptcy.

Assembly lines that make thousands of cars a week are really hard, and Tesla has not yet demonstrated the ability to create one. I hope Tesla succeeds, but I would certainly not buy their stock right now.
  #92  
Old 11-01-2017, 07:40 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 21,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
Sooner or later all of those people who are buying TSLA at its current high share price are going to want to realize a return on their investment. A company (especially a manufacturing company) is far more than its share price. ...
You mean dividends or EPS? People are still buying up AMZN. No dividends and a P/E of something like 280. Pretty consistently ran losses for net earnings until 2016. It didn't mean the company was "tanking" or that those who invested did not experience a return on their investments.

Investors sometimes buy a story, and the belief that others are buying the story and that more will. Several months behind schedule is not going to be enough to convince those who have bought that story that it is more one told at bedtimes than what will really be. They be graced by most investors into mid next year to get production really into gear. And if they run more losses by way of investing more in R&D and in capacity they'll be granted a few years of losses too.

As far as running out of the fuel in the reserves tank goes ... TSLA has had no problem selling bonds when they need cash and could easily issue several million more shares to raise a billion or so more with minimal dilutional impact. If they are indeed ramping up to the rate consistent with 200K+/yr over the course of next year, then they'll find plenty of fiscal charging stations to be able to plug into to get a few more miles down the road.

They might tank. Hell AMZN might yet. Every year for the last decade plus had a cadre predicting AAPL would. Maybe they will yet too. But not TSLA this quarter or this year. If production does not ramp up over the next six months? Then yes, next year they may experience range anxiety.

(I do not directly own any of the stocks mentioned but had been a long time shareholder in AAPL.)
  #93  
Old 11-01-2017, 08:06 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Some nifty videos of their production:
Model 3 General Assembly
Model 3 Welding

The general assembly one is pretty impressive. While not unheard of, installing the dash and seats with robots is pretty uncommon, and usually done by hand.

I listened to their conference call. Their current bottleneck is in a few stages of battery pack assembly. They contracted out the work and there wasn't enough oversight to catch that the subcontractor totally dropped the ball. There are a few other problem areas but that was the long pole for now.

The 3 production ramp seems to be delayed by about 3 months. Not ideal but also insignificant in the grand scheme of things. The X ramp was far more painful and no one cares about it now.

They've gone from 2,500 units in 2012 to 250,000 units today. Although not directly analogous to each other, each order of magnitude increase is a serious change in how the manufacturing is run. They've gone through two such step changes in 5 years; it seems like they can pull off one more.
  #94  
Old 11-01-2017, 08:57 PM
jz78817 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
You mean dividends or EPS? People are still buying up AMZN. No dividends and a P/E of something like 280. Pretty consistently ran losses for net earnings until 2016. It didn't mean the company was "tanking" or that those who invested did not experience a return on their investments.
Amazon doesn't manufacture anything.
  #95  
Old 11-01-2017, 09:03 PM
jz78817 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Under Oveur & over Unger
Posts: 11,758
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
Some nifty videos of their production:
Model 3 General Assembly
Model 3 Welding

The general assembly one is pretty impressive. While not unheard of, installing the dash and seats with robots is pretty uncommon, and usually done by hand.
because doing it by hand (with an ergo assist arm) is faster. The first thing I noticed in that video is that the car those robots were installing seats into wasn't moving. Every single other automotive assembly plant has the cars going down a continuously moving assembly line, and humans (with mechanical assist) are installing parts onto vehicles without stopping the assembly line. That you think that video is "impressive" speaks volumes.

Quote:
I listened to their conference call. Their current bottleneck is in a few stages of battery pack assembly. They contracted out the work and there wasn't enough oversight to catch that the subcontractor totally dropped the ball. There are a few other problem areas but that was the long pole for now.
so you're admitting you believe every single word Tesla tells you?

Quote:
The 3 production ramp seems to be delayed by about 3 months. Not ideal but also insignificant in the grand scheme of things. The X ramp was far more painful and no one cares about it now.

They've gone from 2,500 units in 2012 to 250,000 units today. Although not directly analogous to each other, each order of magnitude increase is a serious change in how the manufacturing is run. They've gone through two such step changes in 5 years; it seems like they can pull off one more.
clearly you've never set foot in an automotive assembly plant.
  #96  
Old 11-01-2017, 09:50 PM
Ravenman is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 25,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
How exactly is Tesla responsible for hitting targets estimated by a random blogger? 83,000 units in 2017 is way out of line with anything Tesla said. Here's an actual quote from Tesla:


Somehow, the blogger went from "5k per week sometime in the 4th quarter" to "5k per week in September and more from then on".

Tesla is definitely a little behind on their ramp, but this Ben Sullins guy isn't a professional analyst and certainly not a Tesla spokesperson; he's a YouTube fanboy blogger.
Okay, Elon said 1,600 cars by September, and reality was 220.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timei...l-3-production

There is no universe, no nitpicking of the numbers, that adds up to anything other than Tesla massively missing its production goals. How can you describe this as “a little behind in its ramp?” Was Hiroshima a “fairly noisy event?”
  #97  
Old 11-01-2017, 10:46 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenman View Post
How can you describe this as “a little behind in its ramp?”
Describing things in terms of time makes more sense than fractions. None of the early numbers are meaningful in the long term (like a year)--even tiny glitches in the setup could bring the entire throughput to 0. The only real question is how far away they are from achieving some reasonable fraction of full throughput. If their conference call is to be believed, that's about 3 months farther away than expected. Compared to Tesla's previous misses, that's barely worth mentioning.
  #98  
Old 11-01-2017, 10:51 PM
Dr. Strangelove's Avatar
Dr. Strangelove is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 7,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
Every single other automotive assembly plant has the cars going down a continuously moving assembly line, and humans (with mechanical assist) are installing parts onto vehicles without stopping the assembly line. That you think that video is "impressive" speaks volumes.
That you think the speed of an individual vehicle has any relevance to the overall throughput of a line speaks volumes. I'm sure Tesla is capable of adding some buffer space before this station so that the line behind it can progress while this is happening.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
so you're admitting you believe every single word Tesla tells you?
I'm just relaying what they said, not taking a hard position on whether it's true. But it was a conference call with analysts, and it would be blatantly illegal for them to lie outright.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
clearly you've never set foot in an automotive assembly plant.
I got a nice tour of Tesla's plant, though I'd consider this a non sequitur. Not sure what it has to do with the different sorts of scaling problems one faces when going from, say, 10 to 100 to 1000 to 10000 units a week.
  #99  
Old 11-02-2017, 12:00 AM
echoreply's Avatar
echoreply is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 800
Tesla just sent an email to Model 3 reservation holders asking us to "view your updated delivery window."

Mine had been November 2017 - January 2018 for a $49k long range premium model or February - April 2018 for a $35k standard model. Mine now shows January - March 2018 for the long range, and "Early 2018" for the standard. I have a March 31, 2016 reservation, but I am not a current Tesla owner, and I don't have any relationship to the company (other than loaning them $1000, this one time).

Paraphrasing something Musk, or perhaps a journalist, said. It doesn't matter if they make 100 or 250 a week now. What matters is when they bump to 1000, 2500, 5000, and 10k per week.
  #100  
Old 11-02-2017, 12:17 AM
Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 21,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by jz78817 View Post
Amazon doesn't manufacture anything.
Stress and discombobulation?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017