5 ms·

Why do auto makers seem to be so against working with Tesla to bring electric vehicles to market? Now that I think about it, it seems like most car companies a

by mlacks 8y ago

Why do auto makers seem to be so against working with Tesla to bring electric vehicles to market? Now that I think about it, it seems like most car companies are trying to do the electric thing on their own, and if they do ask for help it’s from somebody that’s sort of out of their industry and not a direct competitor (yet). This is in contrast with for example how Mazda is working with Toyota on hybrid drive, and how GM used to work with Toyota on hybrid drive. Or is it Tesla that is ‘anti-cooperation’ with industry leaders? I was under the impression that it was teslas goal to make electric cars more common, not necessarily Tesla cars were common. I’ve never properly researched this, but I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon...

TylerH 8y ago
It's likely that Amazon and GM want far more control in the car manufacturing process than someone like Elon Musk would be willing to give. So it's not so much why Amazon and GM aren't willing, but that Musk isn't. Rivian makes superb trucks, but it's incredibly small right now and not likely to last a long time without some kind of deep-pocket investment... especially considering its business strategy is as much an electric vehicle platform as it as a 'traditional' electric automobile manufacturer... that last bit is probably super enticing for a company like Amazon.
- RankingMember 8y ago
  > Rivian makes superb trucks I want EV makers to succeed, but these vehicles haven't even launched yet (won't until 2020), so how can you say that? We'll know what kind of truck they really are once the general public gets their hands on them.
  - sangnoir 8y ago
    Not parent, but we can make judgements on the specs alone - 180 kWh battery, 400+ mile-range, one motor per wheel (with possibility of left and right wheels going in opposite directions - they could theoretically reduce turning radius to almost 0 like a forklift or tank). That sounds superb to me.
    - RankingMember 8y ago
      > we can make judgements on the specs alone Can we? The vehicles we've seen are concepts. We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. A hand-built concept vehicle built in extremely low volumes for press outings (what they have now) would be expected to be impressive, but the real test is whether all of those wonderful specs make it to mass production in a safe, reliable, high-build-quality package (...that doesn't bankrupt the company in the process). The automotive industry is littered with the corpses of companies who touted killer concepts w/ insane specs but couldn't make it happen, or did, and the production vehicle was but a shadow of the concept. Tesla is amazing in that it didn't become one of these companies. That Rivian can mass produce these vehicles to the touted specs for the given prices should not be assumed, and to look at a few concept vehicles and company-provided specs and say "Rivian makes superb trucks" brings to mind George W Bush's premature "Mission Accomplished" banner from way back when. I hope for their success, but they're pretty far from the finish line right now, and getting there will be a real challenge; just ask Elon Musk.
      - sangnoir 8y ago
        > Can we? Absolutely! The norm in a lot of industries is to judge on projected figures (electronics, CPU, GPU, automotive, aerospace, mining, etc). > We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. "Superb" is subjective - I could say a 1965 Porsche 911 is a superb car, even though it compares terribly with a 2018 Toyota Corolla on build quality, reliability, safety or a number of other features.
        RankingMember 8y ago
        The norm in the industries you quoted is certainly not to judge the quality of the product before it exists. I don't recall Anantech or GamePro (RIP) or Motor Trend ever reviewing a product based on conceptual specs and concluding something like "Yep, excellent work, says it has a powerful V8 and a 6-speed but gets 60mpg- awesome, we're done here boys!". If we could just compare vehicle spec sheets, there would be no need for automotive journalists to drive the cars or do long-term reliability surveys. We'll see how it goes for Rivian, but to say "Rivian makes superb trucks" when they haven't made a single street-legal vehicle yet is a hell of a jump. Re: your Porsche comment, I'm not sure what you're getting at. You could indeed say a 1965 Porsche 911 is a superb car, because 1. it actually exists in production form and 2. the public (and automotive journalists) have had the chance to drive and judge it for themselves. Not so for Rivian, which again, has yet to produce anything but concept cars. If you're comparing a 1965 911 against a 2018 Corolla, you're just being silly. Vehicles are compared to other vehicles in the time in which they were introduced. No reasonable person is judging a 1965 vehicle by 2018 standards. Anyways, I'm looking forward to seeing what the production version of these trucks look like. It sounds like they've got some heavy hitter investors on board so hopefully that translates into a solid final product that delivers on the claims they've made.
willart4food 8y ago
Well it's a question of ego. 2 parts: 1. If GM were to - like you say - "work with Tesla", who would be in charge of what to do, when and how? GM would want GM cronies to do that. It would be like Apple after they fired Steve Jobs 2. Even if TSLA would be in the driver's seat (pun intended) who would be working for whom? TSLA is already as big as GM in terms of market cap, and with better future, but in a TSLA-GM JV GM would want to be "da boss". Things are fine the way they are GM, F, FCAU will either die, consolidate or become irrelevant; and the new TSLA-like companies will be the new "energy and transportation" players. Clayton M. Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma is still valid.
dangrossman 8y ago
Tesla had a joint venture with Toyota years ago. They were making the drivetrain for the RAV4 EV. Toyota offered to provide the same kind of training in assembly methods to Tesla that they once provided to GM in the very same place (Tesla's factory is the former GM/Toyota NUMMI factory), but reportedly Tesla clashed with Toyota's engineers and management, so the whole partnership dissolved. I don't think anyone wants to work with them now.
- greglindahl 8y ago
  Huh. The other version of the story is that Toyota refused to accept "one pedal" driving, which by all reports is a huge success.
  - kwhitefoot 8y ago
    No idea if that was the reason but you are correct, one pedal driving works very well and is very intuitive in my 2015 Tesla S 70D. One of the best things about the Tesla cars is not the drive train but the UI; by which I mean the pedals, Autosteer, traffic aware cruise control, as well as the dash. The UI is much less cluttered than most other cars; compare the S and the I-Pace for instance, the I-Pace has loads of buttons and knobs and two screens in addition to the instrument cluster. After a year of driving the Model S I have concluded that my reasons for buying the car were the wrong ones (electric drive train mostly), the reason for keeping it is that the S is simply better to drive because of one pedal driving, TACC, and Autosteer. Most of those features could be added to any car with automatic transmission. Certainly Mercedes could do it and in their top of the range cars already do some of it.
- bobsil1 8y ago
  Toyota also made its big platform bet on mild hybrids and hydrogen, which Elon rightly scoffed at. No doubt there was big culture friction.
  - ProfessorLayton 8y ago
    Agree with your hydrogen point, but curious to know a bit more about your mild hybrid reference. AFAIK Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive was the best in class parallel hybrid system. In fact, many hybrids on the market, such as the Fusion Hybrid, were licensed HSD from Toyota. Honda now has a more advanced 2-motor series hybrid system, similar to the Volt, but both systems are a lot more complex (expensive) than the brilliantly simple way HSD combines power from the motor and engine. Additionally, the hybrid bet paid off handsomely for Toyota.
clouddrover 8y ago
> I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon Volkswagen beat them to it. Volkswagen has developed their MEB electric car platform which they will use across their VW, Audi, SEAT, and Skoda brands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-electric-car-pla-1829257860 https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-... VW is also open to licensing the platform to other manufacturers. Ford is thinking about using the MEB platform for their EVs: https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-use-its-meb-electr-1832269531 https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-us...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mlrtime 8y ago
  Porsche/Audi will need a small redesign after tearing apart a model 3. https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/ https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-p...
robterrell 8y ago
Both Toyota and Mercedes sought Tesla's help with EVs for their California "compliance" vehicles: both the RAV4 EV and the Mercedes B-class EV had a Tesla frame, motors, batteries, and drive controller underneath. I don't know about the MB but the Toyota was rumored to cost roughly 2x the list price. In 2014, after Toyota made roughly 2000 of them (the minimum required by law) they stopped. You can read about the common problems on the forums; lots of the same problems Teslas had in the time period (i.e. loss of all propulsion while driving, loud motor noises followed by eventual motor failure, etc) in addition to software problems bridging the two companies' systems. All solvable but I'm sure Tesla prefers selling $100k cars better than selling $15k generic skateboards.
- ams6110 8y ago
  I thought the MB B-class EV had Tesla motors but their own battery tech. MB has made huge investments in battery factories. https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-battery-factory-us-electric-vehicles/ https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-b...
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    Isn't the B-class that Tesla was involved with the one that was discontinued (in 2017) after selling fewer than 4,000 cars? http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-discontinues-the-b-class-electric-drive http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-disco...
- greglindahl 8y ago
  The Rav4 and B-class had much better performance and range than the cars we usually call "compliance cars".
dankube 8y ago
Mazda and GM (and Nissan, and probably a few others) work with Toyota on hybrid drive because of the wonderful CVT Toyota designed. It's really light years ahead of what the competition had at the time. Everybody has licensed it because it's patented, and demonstrably better than alternatives.

by mlacks 8y ago

TylerH 8y ago

It's likely that Amazon and GM want far more control in the car manufacturing process than someone like Elon Musk would be willing to give. So it's not so much why Amazon and GM aren't willing, but that Musk isn't. Rivian makes superb trucks, but it's incredibly small right now and not likely to last a long time without some kind of deep-pocket investment... especially considering its business strategy is as much an electric vehicle platform as it as a 'traditional' electric automobile manufacturer... that last bit is probably super enticing for a company like Amazon.

RankingMember 8y ago
> Rivian makes superb trucks I want EV makers to succeed, but these vehicles haven't even launched yet (won't until 2020), so how can you say that? We'll know what kind of truck they really are once the general public gets their hands on them.
- sangnoir 8y ago
  Not parent, but we can make judgements on the specs alone - 180 kWh battery, 400+ mile-range, one motor per wheel (with possibility of left and right wheels going in opposite directions - they could theoretically reduce turning radius to almost 0 like a forklift or tank). That sounds superb to me.
  - RankingMember 8y ago
    > we can make judgements on the specs alone Can we? The vehicles we've seen are concepts. We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. A hand-built concept vehicle built in extremely low volumes for press outings (what they have now) would be expected to be impressive, but the real test is whether all of those wonderful specs make it to mass production in a safe, reliable, high-build-quality package (...that doesn't bankrupt the company in the process). The automotive industry is littered with the corpses of companies who touted killer concepts w/ insane specs but couldn't make it happen, or did, and the production vehicle was but a shadow of the concept. Tesla is amazing in that it didn't become one of these companies. That Rivian can mass produce these vehicles to the touted specs for the given prices should not be assumed, and to look at a few concept vehicles and company-provided specs and say "Rivian makes superb trucks" brings to mind George W Bush's premature "Mission Accomplished" banner from way back when. I hope for their success, but they're pretty far from the finish line right now, and getting there will be a real challenge; just ask Elon Musk.
    - sangnoir 8y ago
      > Can we? Absolutely! The norm in a lot of industries is to judge on projected figures (electronics, CPU, GPU, automotive, aerospace, mining, etc). > We know nothing of the build quality, reliability, safety, or a multitude of other characteristics of a mass-production version of these vehicles. "Superb" is subjective - I could say a 1965 Porsche 911 is a superb car, even though it compares terribly with a 2018 Toyota Corolla on build quality, reliability, safety or a number of other features.
      - RankingMember 8y ago
        The norm in the industries you quoted is certainly not to judge the quality of the product before it exists. I don't recall Anantech or GamePro (RIP) or Motor Trend ever reviewing a product based on conceptual specs and concluding something like "Yep, excellent work, says it has a powerful V8 and a 6-speed but gets 60mpg- awesome, we're done here boys!". If we could just compare vehicle spec sheets, there would be no need for automotive journalists to drive the cars or do long-term reliability surveys. We'll see how it goes for Rivian, but to say "Rivian makes superb trucks" when they haven't made a single street-legal vehicle yet is a hell of a jump. Re: your Porsche comment, I'm not sure what you're getting at. You could indeed say a 1965 Porsche 911 is a superb car, because 1. it actually exists in production form and 2. the public (and automotive journalists) have had the chance to drive and judge it for themselves. Not so for Rivian, which again, has yet to produce anything but concept cars. If you're comparing a 1965 911 against a 2018 Corolla, you're just being silly. Vehicles are compared to other vehicles in the time in which they were introduced. No reasonable person is judging a 1965 vehicle by 2018 standards. Anyways, I'm looking forward to seeing what the production version of these trucks look like. It sounds like they've got some heavy hitter investors on board so hopefully that translates into a solid final product that delivers on the claims they've made.

willart4food 8y ago

Well it's a question of ego. 2 parts: 1. If GM were to - like you say - "work with Tesla", who would be in charge of what to do, when and how? GM would want GM cronies to do that. It would be like Apple after they fired Steve Jobs 2. Even if TSLA would be in the driver's seat (pun intended) who would be working for whom? TSLA is already as big as GM in terms of market cap, and with better future, but in a TSLA-GM JV GM would want to be "da boss". Things are fine the way they are GM, F, FCAU will either die, consolidate or become irrelevant; and the new TSLA-like companies will be the new "energy and transportation" players. Clayton M. Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma is still valid.

dangrossman 8y ago

Tesla had a joint venture with Toyota years ago. They were making the drivetrain for the RAV4 EV. Toyota offered to provide the same kind of training in assembly methods to Tesla that they once provided to GM in the very same place (Tesla's factory is the former GM/Toyota NUMMI factory), but reportedly Tesla clashed with Toyota's engineers and management, so the whole partnership dissolved. I don't think anyone wants to work with them now.

greglindahl 8y ago
Huh. The other version of the story is that Toyota refused to accept "one pedal" driving, which by all reports is a huge success.
- kwhitefoot 8y ago
  No idea if that was the reason but you are correct, one pedal driving works very well and is very intuitive in my 2015 Tesla S 70D. One of the best things about the Tesla cars is not the drive train but the UI; by which I mean the pedals, Autosteer, traffic aware cruise control, as well as the dash. The UI is much less cluttered than most other cars; compare the S and the I-Pace for instance, the I-Pace has loads of buttons and knobs and two screens in addition to the instrument cluster. After a year of driving the Model S I have concluded that my reasons for buying the car were the wrong ones (electric drive train mostly), the reason for keeping it is that the S is simply better to drive because of one pedal driving, TACC, and Autosteer. Most of those features could be added to any car with automatic transmission. Certainly Mercedes could do it and in their top of the range cars already do some of it.
bobsil1 8y ago
Toyota also made its big platform bet on mild hybrids and hydrogen, which Elon rightly scoffed at. No doubt there was big culture friction.
- ProfessorLayton 8y ago
  Agree with your hydrogen point, but curious to know a bit more about your mild hybrid reference. AFAIK Toyota’s Hybrid Synergy Drive was the best in class parallel hybrid system. In fact, many hybrids on the market, such as the Fusion Hybrid, were licensed HSD from Toyota. Honda now has a more advanced 2-motor series hybrid system, similar to the Volt, but both systems are a lot more complex (expensive) than the brilliantly simple way HSD combines power from the motor and engine. Additionally, the hybrid bet paid off handsomely for Toyota.

clouddrover 8y ago

> I’ve always wondered why a business model for them isn’t to just provide the skateboard platform for other companies to build upon Volkswagen beat them to it. Volkswagen has developed their MEB electric car platform which they will use across their VW, Audi, SEAT, and Skoda brands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_Group_MEB_platform https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-electric-car-pla-1829257860 https://jalopnik.com/the-fascinating-engineering-behind-vws-... VW is also open to licensing the platform to other manufacturers. Ford is thinking about using the MEB platform for their EVs: https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-use-its-meb-electr-1832269531 https://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-wants-other-automakers-to-us...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mlrtime 8y ago
Porsche/Audi will need a small redesign after tearing apart a model 3. https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-porsche-audi-reverse-engineering/ https://electrek.co/2019/02/09/tesla-model-3-cost-surprise-p...

robterrell 8y ago

Both Toyota and Mercedes sought Tesla's help with EVs for their California "compliance" vehicles: both the RAV4 EV and the Mercedes B-class EV had a Tesla frame, motors, batteries, and drive controller underneath. I don't know about the MB but the Toyota was rumored to cost roughly 2x the list price. In 2014, after Toyota made roughly 2000 of them (the minimum required by law) they stopped. You can read about the common problems on the forums; lots of the same problems Teslas had in the time period (i.e. loss of all propulsion while driving, loud motor noises followed by eventual motor failure, etc) in addition to software problems bridging the two companies' systems. All solvable but I'm sure Tesla prefers selling $100k cars better than selling $15k generic skateboards.

ams6110 8y ago
I thought the MB B-class EV had Tesla motors but their own battery tech. MB has made huge investments in battery factories. https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-battery-factory-us-electric-vehicles/ https://electrek.co/2018/10/08/mercedes-benz-breaks-ground-b...
- greglindahl 8y ago
  Isn't the B-class that Tesla was involved with the one that was discontinued (in 2017) after selling fewer than 4,000 cars? http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-discontinues-the-b-class-electric-drive http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/13097/mercedes-benz-disco...
greglindahl 8y ago
The Rav4 and B-class had much better performance and range than the cars we usually call "compliance cars".

dankube 8y ago

Mazda and GM (and Nissan, and probably a few others) work with Toyota on hybrid drive because of the wonderful CVT Toyota designed. It's really light years ahead of what the competition had at the time. Everybody has licensed it because it's patented, and demonstrably better than alternatives.