Blog A Look at Tesla's EV Competition in 2019

[scaesare]

In Florida, for instance, there are twice as many CCS locations as Superchargers, nicely spread out through the state.

You keep specifically using the term locations, which ignores the fact that Tesla has far more chargers/stalls.

I don't know if that's a deliberate attempt to be disingenuous, but you aren't comparing apples to apples, and that's before you factor in both power(=speed) and location.

In my perusal of the two infrastructure capabilities in the states, it's the rule that you can typically get to your destination reasonably easily... with CCS it appears to be the exception.

 

[wdolson]

From the estimates here, CCS equipped vehicles are currently the 3rd largest fleet with CHAdeMo being the largest.
EV Sales By Fast Charging Standards; The “Big 3” Converge - 2017 Edition

Currently neither CCS nor CHAdeMO standards have very many cars with more than 200 miles range, and very few are used on road trips, whereas almost the entire Tesla fleet has over 200 mile range (except for a few 40 KWH unicorns) and are used for road trips more than any other EV.

There is a lot of talk of that changing in the next few years. (The topic of this thread.) As that happens, the inadequacy of the non-Tesla chargers will come to the fore. Tesla positioned their original superchargers for long distance travel. They only started putting in urban superchargers, which are lower power, in the last year.

The CCS and CHAdeMO networks are mostly urban chargers now with power levels adequate for cars with smaller batteries. Very few non-Tesla EVs on the road today can take the charge rates all Tesla cars built after 2013 can handle.

If the CCS network continues to expand like it is and CCS equipped EVs with decent range come onto the market, I expect the complaints about difficulty finding an open charger and poor charge rates will be rife. Tesla got some bad press when a few superchargers got overcrowded during holiday peak travel times a couple of years ago. Hopefully the media will be as hard on other companies when customers complain that long distance travel is a pain when they have to wait over an hour just to plug into a CCS charger and then only get 50 KW service when they do plug in.

I've only made one long road trip in my Model S, but I found the limit to how many miles I could do in a day was more limited by my body's endurance than by how long it took to get there with charging. (It did take more hours on the road than an ICE, but I was less tired after 600 miles than I was with that distance in a day in an ICE.) I don't think that will be the limit with cars stuck using slow chargers with low availability. A stop that might be 40 minutes for a Tesla could be 2 hours with a slow charger and a wait for availability.

 

[Riggald]

You keep specifically using the term locations, which ignores the fact that Tesla has far more chargers/stalls.

I don't know if that's a deliberate attempt to be disingenuous, but you aren't comparing apples to apples, and that's before you factor in both power(=speed) and location.

In my perusal of the two infrastructure capabilities in the states, it's the rule that you can typically get to your destination reasonably easily... with CCS it appears to be the exception.

IMO, locations to locations is one of the few apples-to-apples comparisons possible. Because chargers to locations (and vice versa) is apples to bananas.

One day, there will be lemon-soaked paper napkins, and getting CCS charger and location numbers for the USA and the EU, and Tesla Supercharger charger numbers for the US and the EU, will be quick and easy. Til then... we're stuck within the art of the feasible.

---

Yep, spreadness matters, and likely charge rate also matters.

The key point of difference between the networks atm is that for Supercharger, almost every state has Superchargers, and pretty much every state has at least one joined up Interstate route through it. Afaict, you're never more than 450 miles from a US Supercharger.

You can pretty much get from any given point to any other given point, and the worst you'll usually get is about 300-500 miles of detour. That, and you will likely more often get a faster rate of charge. Almost certainly, the aggregate charge rate on a coast to coast trip will currently be faster than with CCS.

With both of them, the degree of inconvenience and detouring-for-charge depends on where you are going, but absolutely it depends much more often with CCS. And CCS has many more missing routes, and many fewer joined up corridors. Crucially, with CCS, there are no Coast-to-Coast (C2C) routes atm.

The good news is that with both networks, things change rapidly over time. You can now go Tucson-El Paso-San Antonio-Houston via Superchargers, for instance. That route was missing from the network when I looked a couple of months ago. And CCS is now only one location away from C2C-ing in an I-Pace.

 

[tonybelding]

The key point of difference between the networks atm is that for Supercharger, almost every state has Superchargers, and pretty much every state has at least one joined up Interstate route through it. Afaict, you're never more than 450 miles from a US Supercharger.

Don't forget the Destination Charger program. If you're taking a multi-day road trip, staying overnight at a hotel, there's a very good chance that you can charge overnight from a destination charger. These are often found much further afield from the interstate routes that the Supercharger network serves.

Some hotels also have J1772 charging stations, but once again it's the Tesla chargers that are more widespread and better performing.

 

[Lasttoy]

Laugh, chevy bolt takes 16 days to go 2000 miles. Network, network.
It is funny, Audi introduced a suv for 80k, no place to charge it.
Good luck GM, Ford, and others. Europe has chargers everywhere. We dont. 110v chargers take days .

 

[Riggald]

Don't forget the Destination Charger program. If you're taking a multi-day road trip, staying overnight at a hotel, there's a very good chance that you can charge overnight from a destination charger. These are often found much further afield from the interstate routes that the Supercharger network serves.

Some hotels also have J1772 charging stations, but once again it's the Tesla chargers that are more widespread and better performing.

However, those arguments also apply to non-Tesla chargers, too. You can charge overnight at many hotels, etc, and the lower-speed chargers are much more widespread.
Are the Tesla Destination chargers still more widespread than J1772s? It's hard to tell easily.

 

[tonybelding]

However, those arguments also apply to non-Tesla chargers, too. You can charge overnight at many hotels, etc, and the lower-speed chargers are much more widespread.
Are the Tesla Destination chargers still more widespread than J1772s? It's hard to tell easily.

It's not that hard to tell if you are a regular Plugshare user. Call up a map of your area, then filter for J1772 and Tesla chargers. I found here in Texas there appear to be somewhat more J1172 charging sites in total. However… Then I started picking out hotels specifically, and Tesla destination chargers became more prevalent. I also noticed that, among hotels that have both, two Tesla chargers and one J1772 seems like a common combination.

 

[Gunnaren]

According to the Norwegian EV forum, the official WLTP range of the Audi e-tron is up to 417 km. The corresponding range for Tesla Model 3 LR AWD is 544 km.

 

[wdolson]

I go back to my original point, Tesla broke ground on the GigaFactory in 2013 and just hit production stride this year. That's 5 years.

Tesla was plowing new ground and doesn't have the money of the big players, but at best a big player who was willing to go for broke might be able to cut the breaking ground to full production of a GigaFactory to about 3 years. By 2021 Tesla will likely have the Shanghai plant close to producing cells and GF1 will likely be producing more than it is now.

This is almost 2019 and if Jaguar, VW, and Mercedes were going to be competitive with Tesla's volumes in 2018 by 2021, they should not only have compelling designs rolling out, they should be well along on battery projects as big as GF1. Ground has been broken on some large battery factories around the world, but most of the largest are targeting domestic Chinese production. The "Tesla killers" aren't doing much to compete with Tesla in volume.

VW has signed a contract for $48 billion in batteries, but the only year given in the press release is 2025. They are still talking about building their own factory. According to Electrek they were in negotiations with contractors a couple of months ago
https://electrek.co/2018/10/25/vw-battery-cell-gigafactory/

It doesn't sound like VW Group is going to be able to produce 500K cars a year by 2021. Tesla will likely be producing closer to 1 million a year by then.

Jaguar signed a contract for 5 GWH of cells, which sounds big until you realize that's enough for 55K iPace
Jaguar reportedly signs important 5 GWh cylindrical battery contract with Samsung for upcoming EVs

Tesla makes 3 cars, two of them get more than 300 miles range for the longest range model and the third falls just shy of 300 miles.

In 2018 long range EVs need at least 200 miles of range to be considered competitive, being able to offer a car with at least 300 is going to be considered necessary soon, and Tesla is the only one who can.

The EPA has only tested one of the new European cars (the iPace), but it's numbers do not stack up to the Model X 75D very well:
Compare Side-by-Side
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=40986&id=39841
The iPace's energy efficiency is worse than some hybrids. It has a pack closer in size to the Model X 100D, but has less range than the 75D.

If other manufacturers will producing fewer long range EVs combined than Tesla's 2021 production (battery quantities) and can't compete with Tesla on range, and may or may not compete with Tesla on charging network (I'm skeptical the CCS network will be as good and easy as superchargers, but there is more noise there about doing something), how can Tesla lose market dominance by 2021?

There is a possibility that Tesla will never lose market dominance and will continue to be the one to beat for decades. My prediction is these new rivals will all hit the market like the Chevy Bolt did. A lot of fanfare as the "Tesla killer", initial decent sales, some die hard fans, but after the first year, an "also ran" vs Tesla. In 2017 the Bolt was the #2 selling EV in the US behind the Model S. This year it's #4 behind all 3 Tesla offerings. It's beating the Leaf, but losing out to the Volt.

When the Model Y comes out, it will likely destroy all these other SUVs on price, range, and probably convenience. About all they will have going for them is a fancier interior which will sell some cars, but it won't bury Tesla. These days with aggressive lease deals most Americans who can afford a Camry can also afford a Mercedes or BMW, but Toyota moves a lot more cars in a year. Some car buyers want to be pampered, but most see it as useless fluff.

 

[tonybelding]

In 2017 the Bolt was the #2 selling EV in the US behind the Model S. This year it's #4 behind all 3 Tesla offerings. It's beating the Leaf, but losing out to the Volt.

Well… At least it won't be losing out to the Volt for much longer.

 

[Cosmacelf]

I go back to my original point, Tesla broke ground on the GigaFactory in 2013 and just hit production stride this year. That's 5 years.

Tesla was plowing new ground and doesn't have the money of the big players, but at best a big player who was willing to go for broke might be able to cut the breaking ground to full production of a GigaFactory to about 3 years. By 2021 Tesla will likely have the Shanghai plant close to producing cells and GF1 will likely be producing more than it is now.

This is almost 2019 and if Jaguar, VW, and Mercedes were going to be competitive with Tesla's volumes in 2018 by 2021, they should not only have compelling designs rolling out, they should be well along on battery projects as big as GF1. Ground has been broken on some large battery factories around the world, but most of the largest are targeting domestic Chinese production. The "Tesla killers" aren't doing much to compete with Tesla in volume.

VW has signed a contract for $48 billion in batteries, but the only year given in the press release is 2025. They are still talking about building their own factory. According to Electrek they were in negotiations with contractors a couple of months ago
VW is reportedly going to build its own battery cell gigafactory

It doesn't sound like VW Group is going to be able to produce 500K cars a year by 2021. Tesla will likely be producing closer to 1 million a year by then.

Jaguar signed a contract for 5 GWH of cells, which sounds big until you realize that's enough for 55K iPace
Jaguar reportedly signs important 5 GWh cylindrical battery contract with Samsung for upcoming EVs

Tesla makes 3 cars, two of them get more than 300 miles range for the longest range model and the third falls just shy of 300 miles.

In 2018 long range EVs need at least 200 miles of range to be considered competitive, being able to offer a car with at least 300 is going to be considered necessary soon, and Tesla is the only one who can.

The EPA has only tested one of the new European cars (the iPace), but it's numbers do not stack up to the Model X 75D very well:
Compare Side-by-Side
The iPace's energy efficiency is worse than some hybrids. It has a pack closer in size to the Model X 100D, but has less range than the 75D.

If other manufacturers will producing fewer long range EVs combined than Tesla's 2021 production (battery quantities) and can't compete with Tesla on range, and may or may not compete with Tesla on charging network (I'm skeptical the CCS network will be as good and easy as superchargers, but there is more noise there about doing something), how can Tesla lose market dominance by 2021?

There is a possibility that Tesla will never lose market dominance and will continue to be the one to beat for decades. My prediction is these new rivals will all hit the market like the Chevy Bolt did. A lot of fanfare as the "Tesla killer", initial decent sales, some die hard fans, but after the first year, an "also ran" vs Tesla. In 2017 the Bolt was the #2 selling EV in the US behind the Model S. This year it's #4 behind all 3 Tesla offerings. It's beating the Leaf, but losing out to the Volt.

When the Model Y comes out, it will likely destroy all these other SUVs on price, range, and probably convenience. About all they will have going for them is a fancier interior which will sell some cars, but it won't bury Tesla. These days with aggressive lease deals most Americans who can afford a Camry can also afford a Mercedes or BMW, but Toyota moves a lot more cars in a year. Some car buyers want to be pampered, but most see it as useless fluff.

I agree with one, probably insignificant (to Tesla), exception. In two years, Rivian will have differentiated EVs that don’t compete head to head against Tesla offerings (pickup truck and full size SUV). I expect them to sell well. But they are targeting initial volume of just 20,000 vehicles for the first couple of years (same initial target as Tesla had with their Model S). Even if Rivian does well, I don’t expect it to impact Tesla much.

 

[wdolson]

If Rivian becomes a serious rival to Tesla, it will likely be many years.

 

[barjohn]

I'm not sure. The truck/SUV market is the dominant market in the U.S. and if they can get the financing to acquire some of the plants of ICE vehicles that are closing their volume could grow quickly and significantly. It isn't clear to me that they have the financing needed but that could all change if the vehicles are a big success.

 

[skitown]

If Rivian becomes a serious rival to Tesla, it will likely be many years.

I'm not sure. The truck/SUV market is the dominant market in the U.S. and if they can get the financing to acquire some of the plants of ICE vehicles that are closing their volume could grow quickly and significantly. It isn't clear to me that they have the financing needed but that could all change if the vehicles are a big success.

How are you defining “quickly and significantly”?

 

[Cosmacelf]

I'm not sure. The truck/SUV market is the dominant market in the U.S. and if they can get the financing to acquire some of the plants of ICE vehicles that are closing their volume could grow quickly and significantly. It isn't clear to me that they have the financing needed but that could all change if the vehicles are a big success.

Rivian already bought a huge plant. Ex-Mitsubishi plant in Normal, IL. Fire sale price of $16M (similar story to Tesla). Also, it looks like they have substantial funding ($450M raised to date). They don't need another plant to get to 100,000 vehicles/yr.

HOWEVER, they are like Tesla was in 2010. Two years away from manufacturing their first moderate volume, high priced vehicle, that is expected to sell about 20,000 units/yr. Just like Tesla, they can't turn on a switch and go from 20,000 units to 50,000 units a year. It takes time to do that. AND they don't have a captive battery cell manufacturer. I do think they could get to 100,000 R1T/R1S vehicles a year, just like Tesla is now doing with S/X. But it took Tesla 8 years to get to that point from where Rivian is now.

So, yes, Rivian can do well, but it'll take many years.

 

[barjohn]

Of course, battery production is the biggest bottle neck and we don't know how they plan to address this issue. However, if Tesla can build build a Chinese Gigafactory in about a year +, then who is to say Rivian can't? If you have the money, the drive, the desire and the intellectual capital it is possible. Don't forget that part of the reason it took Tesla so long was that they were first when everyone thought there was no market and it couldn't be done. The timelines change once people are convinced it can be done and they are willing to make the investment of time, blood, sweat and tears. Assuming, and this is a big assumption, that they have the "know how" and access to capital (in the billions, not hundreds of millions) then a 2 year window is a real possibility. However, that may not be their plan or desire so it really depends...

 

[Cosmacelf]

Of course, battery production is the biggest bottle neck and we don't know how they plan to address this issue. However, if Tesla can build build a Chinese Gigafactory in about a year +, then who is to say Rivian can't? If you have the money, the drive, the desire and the intellectual capital it is possible. Don't forget that part of the reason it took Tesla so long was that they were first when everyone thought there was no market and it couldn't be done. The timelines change once people are convinced it can be done and they are willing to make the investment of time, blood, sweat and tears. Assuming, and this is a big assumption, that they have the "know how" and access to capital (in the billions, not hundreds of millions) then a 2 year window is a real possibility. However, that may not be their plan or desire so it really depends...

What exactly are you arguing? Can you give numbers to what you think Rivian can do? Also, as I said before, Rivian does not need to buy or build a factory, they’ve already got one.

 

[barjohn]

The argument seems to be that they can't be a serious rival to Tesla or anyone else for 8 years or more because of the 20,000 unit planned production. All I am saying is that the big obstacles to changing that are money, desire and battery production and that if they had those things it could change much more quickly. In fact, they might be able to be more of a competitor than one might imagine given that Tesla is stretched pretty thin between getting model 3 production up to the 10k/wk target, producing the model Y, producing the new sports car and the semi. That is a pretty full plate by anyone's standards and add a truck to that mix and I'm not sure Tesla can muster the resources to do it ALL in the next 2 years. I hope they can as it would sure make my Tesla stock worth a heap but a reality check says that isn't likely. One other big key is can Rivian or Tesla produce a truck that competes with a Ford or Chevy truck in price, range and amenities? The current truck looks very compelling even though it is not the sexiest design but price will be a big obstacle. I lived in Texas for a couple of years before moving back to California and trucks are the family vehicle of choice but the vast majority are not buying $70K + trucks. Sure, in the big cities like Houston or Dallas they might because trucks are a status symbol in those areas but in the smaller cities and towns they are work vehicles and practical for families with the extended cab.

 

[wdolson]

Getting access to large numbers of batteries are the key to mass production. And being able to get to the point where you do have enough is the tough part. It cost Tesla billions to get to that point. Rivian has enough cash to start production, but not enough to build a GigaFactory.

They have a decent design, but no track record. Building cars is difficult. Rivian could make many mistakes that lead to their failure before they can get to a point where they can access enough batteries.

And Tesla will likely have their own truck close to if not in production by the time Rivian starts production.

 

[corvetteguy]

A car company will not sell many EVs without an extensive Super charger network like Tesla. It was a brilliant move to build out the SC network as Tesla has done. I have heard that Elon has said he is not opposed to letting other car companies use it. If this happens I probably would shop around for my next EV.