erthquake
Active Member
It's a ruse to get Democrats to complain about socialism.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
It's a ruse to get Democrats to complain about socialism.
Drumheller
Active Member
Where did you see that? I read the article and one of the linked articles and saw mention of bailouts and subsidies but I don't recall anywhere it saying the gov't will pay all running costs.
Thanks.
It was this type of interference designed to thwart the natural evolution of its economy that led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union and its abandonment of Communism. Another similarity in America is car dealerships seeking to maintain receipt of economic rent rather than letting the states allow an alternative business model: Strangling Innovation: Tesla vs. 'Rent Seekers'
Reciprocity
Active Member
I have no clue, but I remember thinking Apple was dumb making there own chip and it has dominated since day one and I'm no Apple fan boi, I've never owned a single product. You might look for clues it that timeline. Tesla must have a really good idea of what they need vs what they don't. There would have to be a really good reasons because that is a lot of overhead for a few million cars a year, I guess it makes more sense if they are doing tens of millions of cars because the Nvidia tax is pretty hefty on the p drive px2 compared to what it costs to manufacture.
One place they can optimize is having one system for everything so they don't have to have Intel for the MCU and Nvidia for the AP computer.
I followed the link about the "bonkers" subsidy plan, where I saw this sentence:
Now, I see on my first read I was mis-interpreting it, it does not say that the government will pay for the cost, but the utilities -- mea culpa.
However, it is not clear to me how utilities will pay for those costs if they are above the market price of energy, though, so government subsidy has to be involved in that somehow...
ps: a more detailed explanation from further down in the article:
Based on this, Tesla could game the system by installing enough powerpacks at any renewable power supplier for 90 days of power output, its an insane cost, but the utility would be forced to pay for it
Last edited:
Off Shore
Off Topic Member
NB it may be helpful to remember that none of these people are among the sharpest tools in the box, and Perry in particular is dumb as a post.
dandurston
Member
Semi Addressable Market with Platoon
There's been some talk of what platoon mode could enable in terms of cost reductions, but I've seen little mention of what it could do for the addressable market of the Semi with regards to long haul range. In short, the Semi should be capable of 650+ miles in platoon mode, making it more viable for long hauls than widely viewed.
If you have three Semi's in platoon mode, and the following two trucks consume power at 2/3rds of the normal rate (500 mile/chg), then by exchanging positions, that trio of trucks will have a range of 650 miles. The larger the platoon, the more the platoon range rises to an asymptote, which would be around 750 miles assuming 2/3rds power consumption when drafting (wild guess).
Since platoon mode would be the rational way to do long distance trucking for major operators, the Semi could be more appealing than widely thought once platoon mode is proven. Of course by the time this happens the range might be increased above 500, so it might not be long until platoons could cover 1000 miles.
Further, this has some implications for the design of sleeper cabs. In platoon mode, you would have no need for multiple drivers per truck, since drivers can rest while drafting. Thus you'd still need some kind of a bed, but the space requirements would be less because you could have a fold down bed in the existing cab area. A full sized traditional sleeper cab wouldn't be needed - just a redesign of the current space.
Only small operators unable to take advantage of Platoon mode would need a dual driver cab, but operating like this (2 drivers, no platoon) would be quite uncompetitive so it would be unlikely to last long. Small operators would form some type of network where they could platoon with others.
There's been some talk of what platoon mode could enable in terms of cost reductions, but I've seen little mention of what it could do for the addressable market of the Semi with regards to long haul range. In short, the Semi should be capable of 650+ miles in platoon mode, making it more viable for long hauls than widely viewed.
If you have three Semi's in platoon mode, and the following two trucks consume power at 2/3rds of the normal rate (500 mile/chg), then by exchanging positions, that trio of trucks will have a range of 650 miles. The larger the platoon, the more the platoon range rises to an asymptote, which would be around 750 miles assuming 2/3rds power consumption when drafting (wild guess).
Since platoon mode would be the rational way to do long distance trucking for major operators, the Semi could be more appealing than widely thought once platoon mode is proven. Of course by the time this happens the range might be increased above 500, so it might not be long until platoons could cover 1000 miles.
Further, this has some implications for the design of sleeper cabs. In platoon mode, you would have no need for multiple drivers per truck, since drivers can rest while drafting. Thus you'd still need some kind of a bed, but the space requirements would be less because you could have a fold down bed in the existing cab area. A full sized traditional sleeper cab wouldn't be needed - just a redesign of the current space.
Only small operators unable to take advantage of Platoon mode would need a dual driver cab, but operating like this (2 drivers, no platoon) would be quite uncompetitive so it would be unlikely to last long. Small operators would form some type of network where they could platoon with others.
Last edited:
erthquake
Active Member
It's like the way migratory birds fly in a V pattern. The bird at the front expends the most energy, but each bird behind expends less, and they rotate which bird flies the front.
Some interesting EPA data on Model 3. The highlights are that EPA finally published Passenger Volume for Model 3. It not only beats competitors, but also, as I speculated a while back, after seeing M3 and MS side by side during the summer "VIP factory tour" beats Models S - by 3 cu. ft . Another interesting thing is that it seems that EPA has information on the performance motor rating - 285 kW (382hp). Another surprise is that EPA luggage volume is larger than specified by Tesla - 17 cu.ft vs. 14 cu. ft. specified by Tesla. Hmm - that's some anti-selling...
Compare Side-by-Side
Compare Side-by-Side
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure there is an error in this chart. I know for a fact the Model 3 works with a Supercharger!
DragonWatch
Small FootPrint
I used to joke with my students if something went amiss in class that it was a “communist plot” ~ maybe it really was a communist plot!
Only Putin knows for sure
Last edited:
DragonWatch
Small FootPrint
Hey, on the Semi side, Electrek published a prototype pic of a Semi not through a prototype lense. Search Results for “Tesla” | Electrek Two legged vehicle to the right was a prototype SC station
Last edited:
DragonWatch
Small FootPrint
I can see this as a windfall for Tesla as those of us left with our $600 tax cut investing in Solar energy. The harder the push, the bigger my small footprint. You can bet battery backup will be apart of my system
Reciprocity
Active Member
View attachment 265732
I'm pretty sure there is an error in this chart. I know for a fact the Model 3 works with a Supercharger!
I'm sure they meant supercharged engine. But there is an error in the charge time section. It's not going to take 8.5 hours to charge at 80amp and 240v. That is like 19KW, so probably less then 4 hours from 0% which should never happen and most will not be range charging every day and will stop at 80-90%.
View attachment 265732
I'm pretty sure there is an error in this chart. I know for a fact the Model 3 works with a Supercharger!
Was just going to post the same
. Too slow. Also, it would be fair to rate any EV as having Start-Stop technology, as the motor doesn´t run and isn´t wasting energy when the car is stopped!
Menifeer
Member
It also shows the Model 3 Long Range MSRP at $35,000...View attachment 265732
I'm pretty sure there is an error in this chart. I know for a fact the Model 3 works with a Supercharger!
Reciprocity
Active Member
I think those next 3 weeks are going to be full of surprises. I expect a lot of FUD mixed with very positive news. With the final strike at the end of the month with the deliveries numbers and M3 official update.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
