so does everyone else. my company calls them “PVT” (Plant Vehicle Team) engineers.
yes, it’s normal for suppliers to have one or more resident engineers/production reps on site, especially at launch. but they’re employed by the supplier, not the car company, so they shouldn’t be included in company headcount.
That sounds like a pretty specialized job, though. Tesla has more typical engineering jobs in the same building.
I couldn’t tell you exactly what fraction of Tesla’s engineers are at NUMMI. I know that for SpaceX, essentially 100% of their engineering is in the same building as their rocket production. Musk has an obsession with putting engineering close to production and so for SpaceX they’ve embraced that fully. For practical reasons I’m sure Tesla hasn’t been able to achieve the same level of integration but the trend is there at least.
Not just reps/engineers, and not temporary. They were actually manufacturing the seats (or part of them) on site. At least prior to the Model 3, they had so much extra space at NUMMI that they could get away with this. I’m not sure if this was done for any other component, but they literally had a big cordoned-off area that was a different company.
Also: “shouldn’t”, sure. But a random number from a random article from a random journalist? Not saying it’s right or wrong, but color me skeptical if the journalist put in the effort to verify the specifics of that 6000 number. On topics that I know a great deal about, it’s rare that I see that even the better journalists get this kind of detail right.
But if the 6,000 total employees at Fremont that was reported is accurate, to be as productive as Toyota/GM was ten years prior, roughy 1,000 of those workers would be doing final assembly and 5,000 would be doing other stuff. I find that hard to believe. Not to mention that apparently line workers for Tesla routinely work substantially more than 40 hours/week, whereas I’d have a hard time believing a union shop in 2006 would allow that.
this is nothing but conjecture on your part, and you need to stop presenting it as fact.
Exactly what do you think is conjecture? I’ve toured both the SpaceX and Tesla facilities. I got a more comprehensive tour of SpaceX, and it was easy to see that all of engineering was deeply integrated with the rest. They have, essentially, a 3-story office tower inside the factory that’s visible from everywhere. And rows upon rows of cubicles as one might expect.
I didn’t get quite as comprehensive a tour of Tesla, and didn’t see much of the office portion, so I can’t tell you exactly how integrated they are in comparison. I suspect it’s somewhat less, but if one is constructing a narrative around that 6000 number, it matters quite a lot exactly how much less. There is enough obvious uncertainty that there’s no reason to believe it’s even within a factor of 2 of the “real” number.
Sure–agreed. 1000 isn’t believable. But if 4000 were on final assembly, and there’s a 2x “natural” labor difference between a 2006 Corolla and a large luxury sedan/SUV, then we’re down to a 2x efficiency difference. Not great, but not 6x either. In 2017, they shipped 103k cars without a great expansion. If Tesla is to be believed, they actually improved efficiency by >50% somewhere in that timeframe, so perhaps we’re down to a 1.5x ratio.
I honestly don’t know–there’s just not enough information out there. Just pointing out that the details matter.
Well it’s suppose to have a lot fewer parts than an ICE powered car so it should be easier to build.
The rumors of quality issues have not gone away.
The recent CNBC story centers on reports from former and current workers that many Tesla parts are below acceptable standards and are being sent to an offsite remanufacturing facility 50 miles away to be brought up to snuff.
I got no dog in this fight, but must point out that the part count difference is all in the drivetrain, and for most (all?) ICE vehicles the engines and transmissions are not manufactured in the vehicle assembly plants. This particular point is a red herring.
most of it. you got a tour. great. that doesn’t mean you know exactly who everyone is or what their job responsibilities are.
SpaceX is not Tesla.
SpaceX is not Tesla.
SpaceX is not Tesla.
they’re two separate companies (one private, one public) who do two almost completely different things, with different goals, and different processes.
you can’t tell anyone “exactly” anything just from a tour.
As cool as the 3 looks to be, I just can’t wrap my head around buying a 1st production release car based around less, I don’t know, “robust” technology (can’t seem to find the right word here), having never sat in it let alone driven it, and having to put thousands of dollars down and be given an overly optimistic delivery date. That would make me really nervous. And that’s before learning about the fit and finish concerns, etc.
I am not trying to make anyone feel bad about buying one, I think they are cool (except for that weird, grille-less blunt snout) but it would worry ME personally. I wonder how long it will take for them to fulfill pre-production orders and actually have cars available to put onto dealer lots where people can sit in them and take them for a drive first?
No, but given that I was there with a friend that was interviewing there (having had passed their preliminaries), and that the tour guide was one of their software head honchos, I’m inclined to believe him.
In any case, yes, SpaceX is not Tesla. They just happen to be run by the same guy, who has at every turn espoused the same philosophies for both firms, many of which are easily confirmed (like vertical integration). Oh, and they do share engineering talent–the 3D-printed Iconel contactor being the first that comes to mind (a Tesla part essentially designed by SpaceX).
In any case, I’m not even making a strong claim here. I’m just saying that there’s enough uncertainty in that 6000 number that it’s impossible to compare it to NUMMI making Corollas in 2006. The apparent 6x difference might be damning for Tesla or it might be completely meaningless. Hell, without a cite it’s impossible to know where it came from. It’s such a round number that it might have come from an estimate of cars in the parking lot.
You yourself have said that Tesla’s manufacturing doesn’t appear to be anything special. That carries a strong implication that there’s probably no crazy-high headcount discrepancy, either. It’s not a “lights out” factory and they also aren’t hammering out body panels by hand.
We know, because Tesla has told us, that they didn’t really know what they were doing for the Model S, and they were too ambitious for the Model X, leading to designs that were difficult to manufacture. So we know that there’s going to be some difference in efficiency; perhaps as much as 2x. Only they know for sure. The Model 3 appears to be much more conventional and I suspect we’ll see production efficiency similar to its peers.
Well, to be clear, up until a couple weeks ago, my entire stake in the Model 3 was a $1,000 refundable deposit. If Tesla had launched a piece of crap, I’d have asked for my money back and possibly started looking at a Bolt (though more likely I’d talk myself into a Model S).
Personally, I think test drives are somewhat overrated. I didn’t really even get one for my current car, since no one drives a manual but that’s what I’d ordered. A manual 3-series is a totally different car than an automatic from a driving standpoint.
A few Tesla stores have cars on display, though not for a test drive. Some anxious people have used Turo to rent one for a day. A couple hundred bucks for some piece of mind (and at worst, a fun day of driving in an uncommon car) isn’t a terrible deal, though it’s a little weird to essentially pay for a test drive. Then again, it’s nice to not have to step foot in a dealer.
It’ll be at least 18-24 months before all the preorders have shipped. They’re still at less than a fifth of their target rate (though even at that, they’re the best selling EV within the US in 2018).
I disagree about test drives being overrated. As a flaming car enthusiast and a former car salesperson, there’s just no way I would buy a car that I didn’t like, and I can’t get that self satisfaction from reviews and hearsay, so I’d have to drive it. There might be something about the way it drives, numb steering, wonky electronics suite (Cadillac CUE, I am looking at you), poor acceleration, uncomfortable ride, etc depending on what I was looking for in a car.
I just wouldn’t be comfortable plopping down that kind of coin on a car purchase without going over everything about the car, including driving it. I understand most people’s aversion to going to a dealer lot (at least I was never “that guy” and my customers appreciated it), but for me it’s something I would just endure in my research.
Is your $1000 deposit still refundable if you just don’t like the car? If so, I wonder how long and how many miles you drive it before you get to make that determination before they’ll tell you to pound sand?
“Yes, I’d like to return my 3 please.”
“What’s wrong with it?”
“Nothing. I just hate it.”
That usually doesn’t go over well at dealers. Most of the time if you drive it off the lot, it’s yours, although I think some states have a “cool down period” of a few days allowing such a thing.
As someone else that’s holding a reservation, all of that stuff makes me nervous as well. But a $7500 tax credit helps with the nervousness about out-of-warranty quality issues. Otherwise I’m the type of person that’d be waiting a few years after they’ve worked out the bugs, or another mfg offered something better.
But “down to a 2x efficiency difference” still isn’t a reasonable explaination, since we have an actual real-life auto expert who just said a few posts ago that there isn’t a whole lot of difference between final assembly on a luxury car or an EV.
While I still don’t understand why Tesla is apparently so inefficient, I don’t see that it can be plausibly claimed that Tesla is changing the way cars are made (“Check out our cool robots on YouTube!”) and square that with employment and output numbers that look terrible because of “the details matter.”
Like I said, that’s just my personal opinion. The kinds of things that annoy me about a car aren’t going to be apparent in a test drive, particularly when the dealership guy is saying “slow down up here… you might want to slow down… HOLY SHIT HIT THE BRAKES THERE’S A STOPLIGHT COMING UP.” Ok, he didn’t get to the point of yelling, but how can I test drive a car without exercising the brakes at least a little?
Anyway, I know a hundred times more about the head unit on the Model 3 than I did on my Bimmer after the test drive. I’m not really a “need to kick the tires” guy, and I’ve seen enough video reviews to make a decent judgment. Not to mention stuff like professional BMW drivers saying the Model 3 drives like an E46.
And no, there’s no backsies. Though you can refuse delivery if it looks like they built a heap of junk.
It’s not quite clear to me what jz was saying there, but “looks no different” isn’t the same as “there’s no difference in man-hours required.” I’m sure they all use the same robots and shit, and so assembly looks the same from that perspective. But I don’t believe that all cars using normal manufacturing methods require the same man-hour input. Even for the same model vehicle, surely there is variation between packages. Otherwise one would have to claim that electric seats, sunroofs, 12-speaker stereos, advanced head units, extra cameras, and similar items somehow require zero extra effort to install. Doesn’t make sense to me.
I agree with your logic except in this case Tesla’s delays are parts related. And while drivetrains may be built at a different facility they’re usually (but not always) built by the same company.
I see some validity in comparing the Model 3 to another car manufacturing plant.
While the quality control issues are delaying the company I don’t see them as a deterrent to sales. The delays mean they’re getting them fixed.
It would be nice if they got their shit together. It’s not rocket science and even if it was they’ve got the rocket scientists to fix it. Clearly Musk has no problems buying up engineering talent. Get the checkbook out and buy some more production talent.
Well, folks were comparing x workers at a Toyota factory assembling y vehicles to x[sub]1[/sub] workers at a Tesla factory assembling y[sub]1[/sub] vehicles when you chimed in about the part count. In that specific context the part count is irrelevant, since the larger number of parts in the Toyota are not part of what’s going on at the assembly plant. They’re being put together at an engine plant somewhere else, employing an unknown additional number of workers.
But yeah, it would seem that hiring some people well-versed in auto production would be in order. Poach some folks from Toyota or Honda or wherever. Efficient production of automobiles even while maintaining very high quality standards is a solved problem. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel. Unless, of course, the specific issue is battery packs (I haven’t been following this debate very closely, so if everyone knows that’s the issue I beg your pardon) in which case that would be a wheel that needs reinventing, so to speak.