survival based on tax credits is not a business plan.
Tesla uses the same batteries as everybody else. They will immediately adapt to the first battery that hits the market that is fast charging. Cutting an hour off a battery charge isn’t going to cut it.
I’m not claiming I’m predicting. And yes, that’s absolutely what I’m predicting.
Tesla is spending what little capital they have on things that won’t matter.
Good thing that their survival is not based on tax credits, then. They are helped, but it isn’t make-or-break.
Tesla is hardly putting massive effort into their battery swap efforts. It’s low priority for them and will surely end if and when the tax credits end. They spend way more on their Supercharger infrastructure.
You realize that charging is about a lot more than the raw cells, right? A bunch of pieces need to come together:
Maybe you claim that all that stuff is easy. But if it were easy, other manufacturers would already be doing it, because Tesla is already doing it. They fact that they aren’t proves that they aren’t ready for some hypothetical upcoming cells, either.
You know, you can already get fast-charging cells. The trouble is that they kinda suck. They aren’t as power-dense as the ones that Tesla uses, which means that the pack has lower capacity, which means you have to charge more often. And the pack is smaller, so even if the rate per cell has improved, the whole-pack rate doesn’t improve by the same amount. You end up being better off using a larger amount of traditional cells.
The falcon wing doors are nifty, but seem like an obvious place for a bug to be really problematic.
well that certainly explains the pre-production down payments they collect.
Same difference.
all easily absorbed by multi-corporate projects.
You know, cars are made up of finite space so the “kinda suck” batteries are not part of the discussion.
Honestly, you act like you gave birth to Tesla instead of looking at the big picture. Money makes the world go around. Nothing Tesla isn’t doing is extraordinary other than making beautiful luxury cars and their track record is less than stellar in that regard. The major auto makers have the money and the engineers to bury Tesla. That’s just a fact of life. They will produce electric cars when it’s profitable to do so.
And in the meantime, Tesla will have jump-started the market, and Musk will get rich on bonuses. Not a terrible outcome, all in all.
So why aren’t they doing it? If some podunk upstart like Tesla can do it, then surely the established makers can do it trivially?
It’s not like the other manufacturers don’t already have their own electric efforts. It’s just that they’re all spectacularly unsuccessful. Yes, they’re only doing it because they’re forced to. But right now they have to pay Tesla for ZEV credits, and surely they’d like to save that money by selling their own cars. Furthermore, electrics bring down their fleet average and enables them to sell more high-margin, low-MPG SUVs.
If Tesla had the advantages that other manufacturers have–big, established factory lines; enough clout to improve their supply pricing; an existing distribution network; and so on–they’d already be wildly profitable. Surely the other players want in on that gravy. And for some of them (BMW, Mercedes, etc.), Tesla is already eating their market share, so if nothing else they should want to staunch those losses.
The reality is that none of them are anywhere close. Nissan is the only one taking things remotely seriously, but even then they’re selling golf carts. No one but Tesla has a real electric car.
I predict that Tesla will survive–they may be bought out, but it won’t be a fire sale situation after their collapse. I also predict that some existing manufacturers won’t survive the electric transition.
why aren’t they making limited run cars that would tie up production lines that make money? Seriously?
If it was highly profitable everybody would be making them. Of this there is no discussion.
They’re ALL taking it seriously and that’s why they’re NOT building a lot of them. They’re not in the gas car market, they’re in the transportation market. When people want them they will build them. There won’t be any battery swapping nonsense when it happens.
That doesn’t make any sense at all. There’s really nothing to an electric car compared to an ice car. They were building them 100 years ago and arguing over the same metrics. People will buy the car that represents the best value for the least hassle. Right now that is an ice car. When right battery comes along that will change and all the major players will build the cars that people want because they have the money and the manufacturing facilities to make it happen.
No offense but I predict that you failed high school chemistry class. If you are waiting for some miraculous breakthrough, it won’t happen. The breakthrough will be in manufacturing scaleability to cheaply produce batteries needed to sustain world transportation needs. And by breakthrough I mean smoothly decreasing manufacturing costs on the order of 5-7% a year for the next few years. And by predict I mean postdict.
They’re already making electrics, because they’re forced to. They’re just making shitty ones. If what Tesla is doing is so trivial, then again, why aren’t the other makers doing it already?
The production lines are already tied up. But while Tesla sells a few thousand Model Ss a month, Chevy sells about 60 of their Spark EV. Nissan does somewhat better at 1200 Leafs.
Tesla makes a hefty profit on each S when you eliminate their R&D and expansion costs. Given that the automakers have to make electrics any for regulatory purposes, and given your claim that everything Tesla does is trivially replicatable by other automakers, then those same makers should want in on that gravy train. Currently idle production lines could be used to make high margin cars.
A few of them will figure it out eventually, but not before some pain. They’re lucky that the costs of the massive damage they cause to the environment, human health, and political instability are not factored into the price.
The other manufacturers are looking to make a profit, including R&D. In many respects, building the car is the easy part. Any of these manufacturers could build a Tesla.
What they’re not doing is spending millions of dollars to be the bleeding edge of EV technology, and failing to make it all back by selling cars. At some point, you won’t need to be pushing the limits of technology to build a useful electric car, that’s when the big guys come in and start selling them (for a net profit) at $15k instead of $40k.
As long as the Teslas are plugged into coal burning plants they are bad for the environment, and maybe even worse for human health than the petro cars, what with all of the vaporized mercury being spewed in order to power them.
I guess that depends on whether you are in an area of the country where a lot of coal is used, right?
FWIW, I pay a little extra each month to buy electricity from a company that only provides wind power. Were I to buy to Tesla, do you have any comments on my environmental impact?
After watching the Model X Launch (on video, got too tired to attend the event in person), the safety aspects of the car were actually as compelling as anything else. If I get mine I’ll do an AMA 
The “Bioweapons Protection Mode” sold me.
This depends on where you live, and what your electric source is. I’ve been told that if you live in China, you are doing the environment no favors by driving an electric car. But in the US, you are cutting your carbon footprint substantially (but the precise amount varies based on where you live.)
I honest to God can’t tell if that’s sarcastic or not. 
Blurb from Tesla’s description of the X:
A medical grade HEPA filter strips outside air of pollen, bacteria, viruses and pollution before circulating it into the cabin. There are three modes: circulate with outside air, re-circulate inside air [COLOR=“Red”]and a bioweapon defense mode that creates positive pressure inside the cabin to protect occupants.[/COLOR]
I saw the video, I can’t tell if Terr is sold on it because of the Bio-Weapon Defense mode or not.
Coal, along with other fossil fuels, nukes, and hydro, is the reason that you can contemplate purchasing an electric car with confidence that there will be power to charge it when you need it.
If you are plugging into the grid anywhere in North America you are increasing the gross load on a system that relies on fossil fuels for about 2/3 of it’s electricity, and about half of that is coal. The extra money that you pay is an offset that just means that someone, somewhere, will generate that amount of energy by wind power and add it to the grid at some time. There is no guarantee that it will be added when or where it is needed.
Also, wind power collection uses fossil fuels. It takes energy to manufacture, install, and maintain the infrastructure.
Unless you are planning on charging your Tesla with your own windmill. Either way, I want a ride.
I consider the toxins spewing from coal plants to be a far more urgent and dangerous problem than carbon footprints. Humans have tens of thousands of years of experience dealing with climate change. Vaporized bio-accumulating mercury? Not so much.