5 ms·

> The car companies that have the supply chains, the know-how, and now the motivation to electrify The car companies supply chains are set up for ICE, not EV.

> The car companies that have the supply chains, the know-how, and now the motivation to electrify The car companies supply chains are set up for ICE, not EV. Likewise, their know-how is also for ICE, not EV. It's like saying Kodak was in a prime position to take advantage of the digital camera (which they invented), but it was actually the opposite - they'd spent decades optimizing around a separate core technology and couldn't change until it was too late. I'm not a fan of Tesla for a myriad of reasons and I love cars. But the notion that traditional car companies can magically start cranking out profitable EVs (Tesla made most of their money from tax credits which are essentially gone now) is laughable.

BoorishBears 5y ago
Do people realize how little of a modern car's complexity is the powertrain? The eTron was built on a rework of the Audi platform that's in twelve ICEs before hosting it's first EV. I mean, there's a reason the manufacturers will give you a 100k mile powertrain warranty, but won't cover a broken cup holder past 40k. ICEs have been iterated to the point of boredom. Most engines today are 3rd or 4th generations of their original designs with emissions improvements and moderate power gains. Making flexible platforms, having a supply chain that isn't so starved they're actually able to provide parts post-sale (current global woes notwithstanding), things like that's... That's what make the notion that car manufacturers suddenly can't make cars just because the powertrain changed is what I find laughable. - Actually, funnily enough people don't realize this has actually happened before. 1970 Clean Air act and the 1970 oil crises might as well have been a "reset" in powertrain development. Many cars could no longer exist as they did, and manufacturers had to adjust to a completely new market, with new competition from efficient overseas competitors (who's efficient-focused powertrains previously had no place) Sound familiar? Some companies that were already floundering did fold. American Motors died off and Chrysler picked up the pieces. But for the most part the industry adjusted and moved on. Because at the end of the day the powertrain is just that, the powertrain. It's supposed to be boring for the manufacturers because people will put up with a infotainment system that can't play video games when you're parked, but they won't put up with an engine that works when it wants to.
AnthonyMouse 5y ago
> It's like saying Kodak was in a prime position to take advantage of the digital camera (which they invented), but it was actually the opposite - they'd spent decades optimizing around a separate core technology and couldn't change until it was too late. Their problem is the same one as Kodak, but it's not that they're too optimized for the legacy technology. It's that they don't want to give up the cash cow. Digital cameras don't need Kodak film. Electric cars don't need oil changes from the Chevy dealership. GM absolutely can make electric cars. They don't want to, because that's the end of their service business. It's the end of people buying a new car because their old car won't pass emissions. It's the end of people spending $2500 to put a new transmission in their $8000 car. All they get instead are battery replacements, but the cost of a battery replacement is mostly the cost of the battery, not the labor. And batteries are a fungible commodity, so they have to compete on price with Panasonic and LG and they won't get anything like the margins they currently get for engines and transmissions. They don't want this so they drag their feet. In the meantime it's an opportunity for competitors to eat their lunch. Whether they get on the ball in time to not become Kodak remains to be seen.
- bluGill 5y ago
  > Electric cars don't need oil changes from the Chevy dealership. The car manufactures have nothing to lose from the loss of oil changes, only the independent dealers. > It's the end of people buying a new car because their old car won't pass emissions. It's the end of people spending $2500 to put a new transmission in their $8000 car. Most cars are replaced because the lease was up on the old one. Even way down the line, most places don't have emissions testing for old cars: the car is replaced because the parts wear out. Ever seen a car with 250k miles on it - don't use the door handle to close it, it will just break off more, just ignore the worn spot on the seats, the AC will work for another two weeks if I recharge it - the above is real from my last car - a small number of all the little things (and it still ran great) Transmissions are generally rebuilt by a third party. > All they get instead are battery replacements, but the cost of a battery replacement is mostly the cost of the battery, not the labor. NO, the cost of the battery is they have the ability to replace it. Either you replace all the individual cells (if 18650 a lot of labor - and you need a new chargers for the new chemistry), or more likely the manufacture is keeping everything around to make it even though the car it went in is out of production. Either you are paying for labor, or paying for a battery assembly process for an obsolete car. Third parties might do this for popular cars, but you never know when you buy a car if that battery platform will be used enough for someone else to start production when you need it.
bluGill 5y ago
Most of the car supply chains are the same for EV and ICE. Still the same radio, windows, seats, tires... Yes ICEs are complex but they are not the only complex part. All Kodak shows is that it is possible to not use your prime position. Sometimes companies fail to transition, sometimes they don't. Only time will tell.
andechs 5y ago
A EV is a much simpler device than a ICE - it's a battery and an electric motor, it's much simpler than mechanical power. Gone are oil pumps, transmissions, etc. On top of all this, you can now route power through electrical wires, rather than needing an accessory belt to distribute mechanical power to the A/C, oil pump, power steering etc. The electric car's tech advances are mostly in the battery technology (and vapourware "Level 5 automation in 2019"). Tesla will have a unique differentiator in battery tech and production, but it's not crazy to retool an existing ICE manufacturer to EVs.
- stcredzero 5y ago
  Gone are oil pumps, transmissions Sandy Munroe did a disassembly of an EV motor oil pump just a few days ago. (In fairness, he also notes that one manufacturer has done away with this oil pump, and uses the heat pump instead.) Also, some EVs also have transmissions.
jeeeb 5y ago
> But the notion that traditional car companies can magically start cranking out profitable EVs (Tesla made most of their money from tax credits which are essentially gone now) is laughable. That seems to be exactly what a lot of traditional car makers are doing though. Ford, Audi, BMW, VW, Hyundai, Renault, Nissan, Mazda all have or are adding EVs to their range, and that’s just off the top of my head. They seem to expect profits to reach similar levels to ICEs as well: https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/automakers-finally-see-ev-profit-potential https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/automakers-finally-se... Similarly Honda have announced they’re going to phase out ICEs by 2030 (iirc). Toyota just announced around 10 billion dollars of investment to expanding battery production to 33x current levels and 5 billion in battery technology R&D. Digital cameras destroyed Kodak’s business model of selling film. For car makers though selling EVs is essentially the same business model as selling ICEs. They sell cars not particular types of drive chain. Tesla is now well established as a luxury car brand but I think smaller EV startups are about to be washed out by competition from traditional makers. Smaller traditional makers will likely struggle to make the investment required to make the transition though. There’s likely to be a period of industry consolidation.
Matthias247 5y ago
I've worked at a major automative company in a R&D org of 5k people. Nothing in our org was "set up for ICE", and none of the suppliers would have been specialized for that. Keep in mind that a motor is only one part of a car, and even if you add other drivetrain related parts (exhaust, transmission, etc) it might barely end up as 33% of a car. Infotainment is pretty much independent of the engine (apart from some icons/visualizations/settings here and there), as are most driver assistance systems, safety systems, anti-theft, chassis, mirrors, lights, wheels, brakes, doors, trunks, etc.
- stcredzero 5y ago
  ...Nothing in our org was "set up for ICE",... Infotainment is pretty much independent of the engine (apart from some icons/visualizations/settings here and there), as are most driver assistance systems, safety systems, anti-theft, chassis, mirrors, lights, wheels, brakes, doors, trunks, etc. From what little bit I know about testing of automotive systems, there is a vast warren of disconnected, diverse microcontrollers and separate communications busses in the typical ICE vehicle from several years back. Tesla turned this all on its head. Just about every system with software in a Tesla vehicle can be upgraded by a car's central computer through an over the air update. Exactly the situation you describe above is what some would naively term, "set up for ICE." It's set up for the legacy ICE world, where there were no over the air updates, and the car wasn't a computerized robot on wheels. This legacy can be seen in the failed updates coming out of GM and Ford. There have been reports of legacy auto updates requiring buyers to go back to the dealership, but then the dealers are afraid to apply the update, because they experienced "bricking" the vehicle.
  - detaro 5y ago
    naively, yes. Those developments are basically unrelated to ICE vs EV, at least from what I've seen. Car companies are working on that in ICE models too (and tried before they announced EVs). Car companies make EVs that don't have this kind of integration, and will continue to do so. Some probably have decided to align it and develop it in parallel for EV models only, or at least pretend to do so for marketing reasons, but it's not a fundamental property of either/or. "Having" to do both now of course doesn't make life easier for car companies, many of them still struggle very much with this "software" thing, and it shows.

BoorishBears 5y ago

Do people realize how little of a modern car's complexity is the powertrain? The eTron was built on a rework of the Audi platform that's in twelve ICEs before hosting it's first EV. I mean, there's a reason the manufacturers will give you a 100k mile powertrain warranty, but won't cover a broken cup holder past 40k. ICEs have been iterated to the point of boredom. Most engines today are 3rd or 4th generations of their original designs with emissions improvements and moderate power gains. Making flexible platforms, having a supply chain that isn't so starved they're actually able to provide parts post-sale (current global woes notwithstanding), things like that's... That's what make the notion that car manufacturers suddenly can't make cars just because the powertrain changed is what I find laughable. - Actually, funnily enough people don't realize this has actually happened before. 1970 Clean Air act and the 1970 oil crises might as well have been a "reset" in powertrain development. Many cars could no longer exist as they did, and manufacturers had to adjust to a completely new market, with new competition from efficient overseas competitors (who's efficient-focused powertrains previously had no place) Sound familiar? Some companies that were already floundering did fold. American Motors died off and Chrysler picked up the pieces. But for the most part the industry adjusted and moved on. Because at the end of the day the powertrain is just that, the powertrain. It's supposed to be boring for the manufacturers because people will put up with a infotainment system that can't play video games when you're parked, but they won't put up with an engine that works when it wants to.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago

> It's like saying Kodak was in a prime position to take advantage of the digital camera (which they invented), but it was actually the opposite - they'd spent decades optimizing around a separate core technology and couldn't change until it was too late. Their problem is the same one as Kodak, but it's not that they're too optimized for the legacy technology. It's that they don't want to give up the cash cow. Digital cameras don't need Kodak film. Electric cars don't need oil changes from the Chevy dealership. GM absolutely can make electric cars. They don't want to, because that's the end of their service business. It's the end of people buying a new car because their old car won't pass emissions. It's the end of people spending $2500 to put a new transmission in their $8000 car. All they get instead are battery replacements, but the cost of a battery replacement is mostly the cost of the battery, not the labor. And batteries are a fungible commodity, so they have to compete on price with Panasonic and LG and they won't get anything like the margins they currently get for engines and transmissions. They don't want this so they drag their feet. In the meantime it's an opportunity for competitors to eat their lunch. Whether they get on the ball in time to not become Kodak remains to be seen.

bluGill 5y ago
> Electric cars don't need oil changes from the Chevy dealership. The car manufactures have nothing to lose from the loss of oil changes, only the independent dealers. > It's the end of people buying a new car because their old car won't pass emissions. It's the end of people spending $2500 to put a new transmission in their $8000 car. Most cars are replaced because the lease was up on the old one. Even way down the line, most places don't have emissions testing for old cars: the car is replaced because the parts wear out. Ever seen a car with 250k miles on it - don't use the door handle to close it, it will just break off more, just ignore the worn spot on the seats, the AC will work for another two weeks if I recharge it - the above is real from my last car - a small number of all the little things (and it still ran great) Transmissions are generally rebuilt by a third party. > All they get instead are battery replacements, but the cost of a battery replacement is mostly the cost of the battery, not the labor. NO, the cost of the battery is they have the ability to replace it. Either you replace all the individual cells (if 18650 a lot of labor - and you need a new chargers for the new chemistry), or more likely the manufacture is keeping everything around to make it even though the car it went in is out of production. Either you are paying for labor, or paying for a battery assembly process for an obsolete car. Third parties might do this for popular cars, but you never know when you buy a car if that battery platform will be used enough for someone else to start production when you need it.

bluGill 5y ago

Most of the car supply chains are the same for EV and ICE. Still the same radio, windows, seats, tires... Yes ICEs are complex but they are not the only complex part. All Kodak shows is that it is possible to not use your prime position. Sometimes companies fail to transition, sometimes they don't. Only time will tell.

andechs 5y ago

A EV is a much simpler device than a ICE - it's a battery and an electric motor, it's much simpler than mechanical power. Gone are oil pumps, transmissions, etc. On top of all this, you can now route power through electrical wires, rather than needing an accessory belt to distribute mechanical power to the A/C, oil pump, power steering etc. The electric car's tech advances are mostly in the battery technology (and vapourware "Level 5 automation in 2019"). Tesla will have a unique differentiator in battery tech and production, but it's not crazy to retool an existing ICE manufacturer to EVs.

stcredzero 5y ago
Gone are oil pumps, transmissions Sandy Munroe did a disassembly of an EV motor oil pump just a few days ago. (In fairness, he also notes that one manufacturer has done away with this oil pump, and uses the heat pump instead.) Also, some EVs also have transmissions.

jeeeb 5y ago

> But the notion that traditional car companies can magically start cranking out profitable EVs (Tesla made most of their money from tax credits which are essentially gone now) is laughable. That seems to be exactly what a lot of traditional car makers are doing though. Ford, Audi, BMW, VW, Hyundai, Renault, Nissan, Mazda all have or are adding EVs to their range, and that’s just off the top of my head. They seem to expect profits to reach similar levels to ICEs as well: https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/automakers-finally-see-ev-profit-potential https://europe.autonews.com/automakers/automakers-finally-se... Similarly Honda have announced they’re going to phase out ICEs by 2030 (iirc). Toyota just announced around 10 billion dollars of investment to expanding battery production to 33x current levels and 5 billion in battery technology R&D. Digital cameras destroyed Kodak’s business model of selling film. For car makers though selling EVs is essentially the same business model as selling ICEs. They sell cars not particular types of drive chain. Tesla is now well established as a luxury car brand but I think smaller EV startups are about to be washed out by competition from traditional makers. Smaller traditional makers will likely struggle to make the investment required to make the transition though. There’s likely to be a period of industry consolidation.

Matthias247 5y ago

I've worked at a major automative company in a R&D org of 5k people. Nothing in our org was "set up for ICE", and none of the suppliers would have been specialized for that. Keep in mind that a motor is only one part of a car, and even if you add other drivetrain related parts (exhaust, transmission, etc) it might barely end up as 33% of a car. Infotainment is pretty much independent of the engine (apart from some icons/visualizations/settings here and there), as are most driver assistance systems, safety systems, anti-theft, chassis, mirrors, lights, wheels, brakes, doors, trunks, etc.

stcredzero 5y ago
...Nothing in our org was "set up for ICE",... Infotainment is pretty much independent of the engine (apart from some icons/visualizations/settings here and there), as are most driver assistance systems, safety systems, anti-theft, chassis, mirrors, lights, wheels, brakes, doors, trunks, etc. From what little bit I know about testing of automotive systems, there is a vast warren of disconnected, diverse microcontrollers and separate communications busses in the typical ICE vehicle from several years back. Tesla turned this all on its head. Just about every system with software in a Tesla vehicle can be upgraded by a car's central computer through an over the air update. Exactly the situation you describe above is what some would naively term, "set up for ICE." It's set up for the legacy ICE world, where there were no over the air updates, and the car wasn't a computerized robot on wheels. This legacy can be seen in the failed updates coming out of GM and Ford. There have been reports of legacy auto updates requiring buyers to go back to the dealership, but then the dealers are afraid to apply the update, because they experienced "bricking" the vehicle.
- detaro 5y ago
  naively, yes. Those developments are basically unrelated to ICE vs EV, at least from what I've seen. Car companies are working on that in ICE models too (and tried before they announced EVs). Car companies make EVs that don't have this kind of integration, and will continue to do so. Some probably have decided to align it and develop it in parallel for EV models only, or at least pretend to do so for marketing reasons, but it's not a fundamental property of either/or. "Having" to do both now of course doesn't make life easier for car companies, many of them still struggle very much with this "software" thing, and it shows.