-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
erthquake
Active Member
Tesla. Panasonic makes the cells, Tesla designs and makes the battery packs that actually go into the cars.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Which Chinese battery maker IS bigger that CATL?
tinm
2020 Model S LR+ Owner
Funny, I pitched this very idea, in detail, to Kimbal Musk (who runs The Kitchen restaurant business from Denver) like 18+ months ago and suggested we discuss with Elon. The response: silence. You watch: it'll be exactly what they go do.
Tesla, not Panasonic.
You look at the whole thing as a bean counter, and keep reading reports by bean counters. What you and they are missing is that integration of batteries into the final product, in order to produce compelling EV, requires enormous amount of engineering optimization. It is done by Tesla. It is not possible by assembling black boxes into EVs. The proof is on the surface, but you need to be willing to remove the bean counter hat to realize it. There is only one company on earth which **owns** design and manufacturing of all major systems in an EV. And it is the only company that produces coimpelling 200+ miles EV that can compete head to head with an ICE in the same class.
One of the fundamental reasons that others were not able to produce the compelling EV is beacuse they never raised to the level of system engineering and optimization that is required to do so.
So Tesla owns the facility, specs and design of the battery cells that are manufacured by Panasonic for them. Tesla also owns both design and manufacturing of the battery pack.
I wonder what would happen if people went on Apple discussions everywhere and insisted on calling their products FoxConn products.
looks good to me, from Teslarati
Tesla Model 3 actually has 334 miles of range according to EPA data
Tesla appears to have chosen the use of the lower 310 number, so not clear how widely known this will become... and this story looks like it broke today, so, possibly some smoke to settle on just what we are seeing.
Tesla Model 3 actually has 334 miles of range according to EPA data
Tesla appears to have chosen the use of the lower 310 number, so not clear how widely known this will become... and this story looks like it broke today, so, possibly some smoke to settle on just what we are seeing.
Last edited:
Funny that. I agree 110% with you hete. I have been telling the same thing for years (to you as well) : Tesla is exceptionally strong in turning out compelling EV cars that are much more than the sum of their parts (like batteries). As you cetainly know, it's my main argument why I don't want Tesla to waste time with a mundane product like Tesla Energy.
But there are many here who don't see things this way. That build their argument on the fact that no one else has battery supply (the real bean counters). Those that say : "show me the Chinese battery factories" or "where is VW/BMW/... going to get their batteries" etc. And those posters of course are much alarmed when I simply tell them that they count their beans wrong. Because they don't see that even if Tesla were the smallest battery producer, it would still be turning out the most compelling EV's... And then they get all defensive when it turns out that China is mass producing batteries. It's just not making exciting products with it.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
The Robots are Coming! - I, Cringely
"I was shocked five years ago, for example, when my friend Shoichiro Irimajiri told me that automobile wiring harnesses had reached the point where they cost as much to build as the engine and transmission for the same car."
"I was shocked five years ago, for example, when my friend Shoichiro Irimajiri told me that automobile wiring harnesses had reached the point where they cost as much to build as the engine and transmission for the same car."
Seems like it is time to repost this:
So... one thing to note in China is that most of the production is LiFePO4 chemistry which is both not competitive and qualified for government incentives... NMC cut over only started happening at the beginning of this year:
China approves first list of green car models for subsidies this year
So talking about Chinese production, one has to sort out how much NMC production is out there which is small because they are only cutting over this year. AFAIK, none of BYD's production is NMC for instance. Then there's quality issues as this is new for Chinese production.
Both charts have problems, most notably with respect to Tesla's production level. The first chart conveniently leaves off Japanese production entirely and AESC production worldwide. It also overstates LG Chem's Ochang facility's capabilities. The 2nd chart overstates LG Chem's capacity since we really don't know what "commissioned" means. Note that 2016 sales of LG Chem's automotive cells amounted to 2.3 GWh according to this:
EV Sales: Battery Makers 2016 (Cars)
Hard to believe that they had 12-17 GWh either available or "commissioned" and other source documentation also contradicts those figures. On the other hand, Tesla and Panasonic's figures are low if one was using the same metrics. Panasonic's 2016 automotive cell shipments was more than 50% higher than BYD's LiFePO4's at over 6 GWh and more than double LG's. Tesla's commissioned amount should be 16-18 GWh, Panasonic's is something like 10-12 GWh. And under construction/announced/available by 2021 is vastly larger. At least 105 GWh, if not hundreds of GWh.
Both of these charts by FT/Benchmark Mineral Intelligence and by BNEF are clearly designed to promote a story. My speculation is that this is for promoting Chinese production, presumably to raise money. They also both over-inflate LG Chem's status and minimize Panasonic, Tesla, SKI and AESC. Given the mistakes presented by both reports which are then repeated in all sorts of media outlets over and over, either both Benchmark Mineral Intelligence and BNEF are incompetent or they are deliberately spreading misinformation. I am not sure which it is yet. But in any case, some of their data does match up with other sources and provides a decent enough start.
Last edited:
anticitizen13.7
Not posting at TMC after 9/17/2018
FT's data shows 16-17 GWh of production capacity in 2016. That says nothing about the type of chemistry or suitability of the cells for automotive applications.
Given China's aggressive push for domestic automakers to transition to electric, I am skeptical that the Chinese battery industry will suddenly have 30 spare GWh of production to sell to German automakers.
I am not stating that European automotive companies won't source some cells from China to build packs. I am skeptical that there will be enough excess supply of the proper cells for a mass market car of the quality and performance characteristics expected from major European brands.
ValueAnalyst
Closed
Why switching to fully electric cars will take time
"They are not saying they will get rid of diesel or petrol cars completely. They are simply promising to make electrified versions of them available."
"They are not saying they will get rid of diesel or petrol cars completely. They are simply promising to make electrified versions of them available."
MartinAustin
Active Member
"Tesla states that its Long Range Model 3 is capable of 310 miles of driving range per single charge, but the company might be voluntarily under reporting its true driving range according to data revealed in the official EPA certification summary report for the vehicle."
That could well mean that the "Standard" 220-mile version of the Model 3 is also being under-reported.
I wonder if it will be above 238
Value Walk letter. I particularly liked some comments by Ron Baron, Tesla bull.
Analysts Clash Over TSLA Stock, Ending The Rally After Record High
Ron Baron part:
In his letter contained in the report, CEO Ronald Baron offered up several qualitative, as opposed to quantitative, reasons he sees TSLA stock in a bullish light. For example, he reports that the automaker often is able to buy parts at better prices than its competitors can even though it requires “precision engineering, quality materials, and functional design resulting in minimal waste.” He believes that vendors are willing to offer lower prices is because they “think Tesla’s engineering skills and designs will make them better suppliers.
Additionally, he reports that General Motors CEO Mary Barra has told her supply chain to use Tesla’s suppliers, even if their prices are higher. According to Baron, she sees this as a way to reduce warranty and maintenance costs, improve safety and enhance her company’s reputation. He also had a chance to meet a venture capitalist and engineer who knows both Musk and Tesla CTO JB Straubel and believes that no one is better than they are at battery technology. Thus, Baron’s unique way of researching TSLA stock led him to conclude that it could be an attractive long-term investment
Analysts Clash Over TSLA Stock, Ending The Rally After Record High
Ron Baron part:
In his letter contained in the report, CEO Ronald Baron offered up several qualitative, as opposed to quantitative, reasons he sees TSLA stock in a bullish light. For example, he reports that the automaker often is able to buy parts at better prices than its competitors can even though it requires “precision engineering, quality materials, and functional design resulting in minimal waste.” He believes that vendors are willing to offer lower prices is because they “think Tesla’s engineering skills and designs will make them better suppliers.
Additionally, he reports that General Motors CEO Mary Barra has told her supply chain to use Tesla’s suppliers, even if their prices are higher. According to Baron, she sees this as a way to reduce warranty and maintenance costs, improve safety and enhance her company’s reputation. He also had a chance to meet a venture capitalist and engineer who knows both Musk and Tesla CTO JB Straubel and believes that no one is better than they are at battery technology. Thus, Baron’s unique way of researching TSLA stock led him to conclude that it could be an attractive long-term investment
This is impressive. I have long regarded supply chain (other than the electric drive train) is a fortress traditional OEMs hold and would be rather hard for Tesla to breach.
Just a note, the analyst issued a bear coverage from Jefferies is Philippe Houchois. He worked in the auto sector at UBS from 2008-2016, you know, where our dear Colin Langan also works.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
