4 ms·

Beyond the hype, I think it's feasible to believe that Tesla has a massive multi-year advantage that other car companies will be playing catchup to for a very l

by 013a 8y ago

Beyond the hype, I think it's feasible to believe that Tesla has a massive multi-year advantage that other car companies will be playing catchup to for a very long time. Having the global manufacturing infrastructure of someone like Ford or VAG certainly seems like an advantage, but retrofitting that infrastructure to manufacture electric vehicles isn't exactly trivial or cheap. Then consider you also need to "retrofit" all of your people to figure out how to make electric vehicles (or hire new people). The platforms that worked for ICEs don't work for EVs. The electronics don't work. It requires a huge number of new parts. And the parts that stay the same might not be well-suited for EVs; ICE buyers, especially BMW, don't really care about fuel economy, but every EV buyer does care about range. That's a huge shift that affects every part; seats have to be lighter, made of different materials, you have to use more aluminum and carbon fiber in more expensive models, aerodynamics change, etc. Then consider Tesla's massive lead in battery production which serves to drive down price and increase their technology lead.

gamblor956 8y ago
Your greatly overstating Tesla's advantages. EV drivetrains aren't quite drop in replacements but they are close enough that the first modern commercial EVs... including Tesla...were simply converted ICE vehicles. Also, Tesla doesn't make batteries, Panasonic does. Tesla just assembles them. Panasonic also sells batteries to Tesla's competition. And based on Tesla's past issues with paying vendors, if they miss even a single payment to Panasonic their supply advantage could disappear immediately.
- leesec 8y ago
  Yes those cars were converted ICE vehicles... in 2008. Sounds like a multi year advantage to me.
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    No fewer than a dozen car companies are planning to launch more advanced EVs than Tesla within the next 3 years. Tesla can't afford the capital investment it needs to compete with that generation of competition, largely because it executed this generation's launch so poorly.
    - leesec 8y ago
      Lol honestly are you trolling? Tesla has 50% of the EV market share and is by far the leader in tech. I would love to see anything even close to the specs of the new roadster. Or honestly if any company has any plans for anything as good as the Model S that would be great. And wouldn't 3 years away give Tesla a multi-year advantage, as claimed?
- 013a 8y ago
  Of course the first ones were converted ICE vehicles. I could take a lawnmover and make it electric, that doesn't mean it would feasibly compete with a true designed-from-scratch electric lawnmower. Those first EVs designed like that sucked. Seriously. Horrible range. Bad part fit. The roadster in a Lotus body was a fast car with decent range, but it also weighed almost nothing, had two seats, and no storage capacity. Come on, you're smarter than to think that's a good argument. Look at Audi and the e-tron. They're advertising "200+ miles of range", but the only real road test we've heard about so far had it below that, at closer to 175. Meanwhile, the Model X is getting up to 300. And, by the way, before you say it: Yes, the price on both of these is about the same, at the $80k mark. Consider the Bolt. It's got a range of ~240mi. For roughly the same price (~$40k), a Model 3 will do 310, and it will do those miles with substantially better performance and AWD (and also not look like a squished minivan, beside the point). Who else is there? The Leaf? Ford Focus Electric? BMW i3? Hilarious. I'm tired of this argument that "the traditional manufacturers will catch up." It's the same argument we were making 4 years ago, 2 years ago, 6 months ago, nothing has changed. They haven't caught up. It's seemingly increasingly likely that the 2021 model year cars might compete with what Tesla is putting out today, in 2018. What will Tesla have by then? Who's to say. These companies aren't doomed; the car market is vastly large enough to have many many people competing. But Tesla is in a position today to be #1 for a very long time. Their valuation will level off to be more realistic as their revenue catches up with the hype.
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    For roughly the same price (~$40k), a Model 3 will do 310, and it will do those miles with substantially better performance and AWD (and also not look like a squished minivan, beside the point). Categorically false, as the Model 3s do not currently sell for that amount with that range. Cheapest model 3 is $46k, without upgrades. Can't find anything about the electric-only etron, which hasn't been released yet. The hybrid etron only has 16 miles of pure EV range. BMW's I3 is a superior riding experience, range and acceleration aside. Even the Leaf and Focus Electric are nicer to ride in. After the novelty of "Ludicrous" mode wears off, the actual driver experience matters most to most car buyers. Considering that most people don't have a 150-mile commute, the Model 3's only advantage is for the hypothetical holiday drive. Most people would just rather have a nicer car.
- greglindahl 8y ago
  The Roadster wasn't a "converted ICE vehicle". Only the outer shell was from Lotus. That's a relatively small % of the weight and value of the car.

by 013a 8y ago

gamblor956 8y ago

Your greatly overstating Tesla's advantages. EV drivetrains aren't quite drop in replacements but they are close enough that the first modern commercial EVs... including Tesla...were simply converted ICE vehicles. Also, Tesla doesn't make batteries, Panasonic does. Tesla just assembles them. Panasonic also sells batteries to Tesla's competition. And based on Tesla's past issues with paying vendors, if they miss even a single payment to Panasonic their supply advantage could disappear immediately.

leesec 8y ago
Yes those cars were converted ICE vehicles... in 2008. Sounds like a multi year advantage to me.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  No fewer than a dozen car companies are planning to launch more advanced EVs than Tesla within the next 3 years. Tesla can't afford the capital investment it needs to compete with that generation of competition, largely because it executed this generation's launch so poorly.
  - leesec 8y ago
    Lol honestly are you trolling? Tesla has 50% of the EV market share and is by far the leader in tech. I would love to see anything even close to the specs of the new roadster. Or honestly if any company has any plans for anything as good as the Model S that would be great. And wouldn't 3 years away give Tesla a multi-year advantage, as claimed?
013a 8y ago
Of course the first ones were converted ICE vehicles. I could take a lawnmover and make it electric, that doesn't mean it would feasibly compete with a true designed-from-scratch electric lawnmower. Those first EVs designed like that sucked. Seriously. Horrible range. Bad part fit. The roadster in a Lotus body was a fast car with decent range, but it also weighed almost nothing, had two seats, and no storage capacity. Come on, you're smarter than to think that's a good argument. Look at Audi and the e-tron. They're advertising "200+ miles of range", but the only real road test we've heard about so far had it below that, at closer to 175. Meanwhile, the Model X is getting up to 300. And, by the way, before you say it: Yes, the price on both of these is about the same, at the $80k mark. Consider the Bolt. It's got a range of ~240mi. For roughly the same price (~$40k), a Model 3 will do 310, and it will do those miles with substantially better performance and AWD (and also not look like a squished minivan, beside the point). Who else is there? The Leaf? Ford Focus Electric? BMW i3? Hilarious. I'm tired of this argument that "the traditional manufacturers will catch up." It's the same argument we were making 4 years ago, 2 years ago, 6 months ago, nothing has changed. They haven't caught up. It's seemingly increasingly likely that the 2021 model year cars might compete with what Tesla is putting out today, in 2018. What will Tesla have by then? Who's to say. These companies aren't doomed; the car market is vastly large enough to have many many people competing. But Tesla is in a position today to be #1 for a very long time. Their valuation will level off to be more realistic as their revenue catches up with the hype.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  For roughly the same price (~$40k), a Model 3 will do 310, and it will do those miles with substantially better performance and AWD (and also not look like a squished minivan, beside the point). Categorically false, as the Model 3s do not currently sell for that amount with that range. Cheapest model 3 is $46k, without upgrades. Can't find anything about the electric-only etron, which hasn't been released yet. The hybrid etron only has 16 miles of pure EV range. BMW's I3 is a superior riding experience, range and acceleration aside. Even the Leaf and Focus Electric are nicer to ride in. After the novelty of "Ludicrous" mode wears off, the actual driver experience matters most to most car buyers. Considering that most people don't have a 150-mile commute, the Model 3's only advantage is for the hypothetical holiday drive. Most people would just rather have a nicer car.
greglindahl 8y ago
The Roadster wasn't a "converted ICE vehicle". Only the outer shell was from Lotus. That's a relatively small % of the weight and value of the car.