Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

All discussion of Nikola Motors

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I have no stake in NKLA, but after reading and watching a bunch of NKLA related articles and videos, I think there is a large confirmation bias going on - even in this thread. Putting aside all the claims by the execs, Nikola comes across as an integrator. Think DELL. In the beginning they just slapped parts from Intel, Phoenix bios, Samsung, etc. and made a business out of it. Did they have an IP? Did they solve some gigantic world problem? Did they bring about 5nm chips back in 2005? No. But they made a business. From what I am gathering Nikola merely was doing the same. Further it figured over time (and this is key) they will replace some of those underlying parts with their own. Not today, but later. Dell did too. They now write their own BIOS, or make their own motherboard. So, putting aside outlandish claims, the model is not the worst thing ever as many purport it to be. Nikola was going to be the glue piecing the parts together at first and then later maybe even specialized in some areas. There should not be a requirement to have solved a major tech breakthrough to have a viable company.

Having said all that they did hype those "later coming" things, without qualifying them properly as such. And that's a mistake imo. They fell into the larger narrative of comparing to Tesla (as media/public will now do to each and every new entrant) and they felt they needed that to compete. I don't think they did personally, but I am not in a position to raise billions for my venture either. And that's a slippery slope. Once you get out there and say you have that future thing now, well then you have trucks rolling downhill without an engine inside. And the focus and original approach is lost in all the subsequent noise.

Maybe they can get back to being an integrator and solve their core H2 costs and business model. But given the reputational damage, not sure how easily they can now raise those precious billions they need to make it.
While you had a good start you quickly went down hill. Nikola didn't start as an integrator and then decide to insource, they were founded on the premise of having breakthrough technology, but since they were hiring friends & family and couldn't make anything work they outsourced everything. The final capitulation was the deal with GM where GM designs, engineers and manufactures for them. Nikola has nothing.

The only real disagreement I have with some of the other folks here is in how long Nikola can keep doing the zombie shuffle. I happen to think it may go on quite a while, probably at least a year, and longer if they raise enough money. Why anyone would give them money is beyond me, but Tesla just didn't an absolutely amazing presentation where they are already piloting what is projected to be a 56% cost reduction in battery production and $TSLA dropped nearly 5%. And Nikola has not already capitulated (they bring nothing to the table, GM does it all) but they've been caught perpetrating fraud and more people keep buying!

The market is irrational and I can accept that. I've invested in $TSLA for the long haul so while these temporary drops are annoying they don't really matter. In two more years the stock will be much higher than it is now -- possibly even after another split. In two more years it will take a miracle for Nikola to be in the black. They may not be Theranos, but they are no Dell.
 
Looks like Nikola's twitter account has been deleted. @nikolatrevor is gone.

But there is an account with '0' instead of 'o' and that has this one tweet:

upload_2020-9-22_19-13-34.png
 
Couple stories this morning:

How Diligent Was GM About Its Deal With Nikola?

how did it come to pass that all those smart people either didn’t foresee or more properly brace themselves for the clown rodeo now swamping its partnership with Nikola Corp.? More to the point, might it have been wiser for GM to have avoided hitching its wagon to Nikola in the first place?
{emphasis added}

This goes on and on, but you get the picture. And you also didn’t need to wait for Hindenburg to draw that picture for you.


And this from the WSJ: Nikola’s Talks With Major Energy Firms Stalled Following Short-Seller Report (paywall)

Talks between electric-truck maker Nikola Corp. and several potential partners, including BP PLC, to build hydrogen-refueling stations stalled following allegations the company had misled investors, according to people familiar with the matter.

The setback is the first outward indication that the controversy around the report is impacting the startup’s ability to execute its business plan.
 
Do you remember images of "Nikola batteries" for TRE. They are actually from Romeo Power. And design is quit awful according to Nikola Insider (I copied the whole text here coz twitter threads are sometimes hard to follow or even link back to):
http:// https://twitter.com/InsiderNikola/status/1308169250851360768
https://twitter.com/InsiderNikola/status/1308169250851360768

It wasn't the biggest news to drop this weekend, but the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal both confirmed the rumor that Nikola signed a contract with Romeo Power to use their batteries in the Tre. Here is a (long) thread explaining why this is so important.

Not only does this represent yet another lie from Nikola (Trevor stated on several occasions that the Tre would be using Nikola batteries) but it also has forced them to make a grave design error. This thread will be a little technical, but I'll try to explain this crucial error.

So, a little background on battery design. When you are designing a battery you have two separate things that you have to account for: capacity, which gives you range, and voltage, which allows you to provide necessary power. You get both of these by connecting together cells.

There are two different ways you can connect cells: In parallel, which increases capacity while keeping voltage unchanged, or in series which increases capacity AND voltage. An automotive scale battery will have cells connected in parallel and then those groups in series.

The problem comes when, like Nikola, you are stuck using off the shelf modules: For these, the cell groups are already set for you and you are stuck with them. If it isn't what you need for your battery design, you're stuck. This is why custom battery design is crucial.

In the case of Nikola, the Hermes modules they are using from Romeo Power have a capacity of 10 kWh and have a voltage of about 100 V when topped off.

To power their truck, they need 800V, so that's 8 modules connected in series.

But this sets the capacity for them: 8 modules of 10 kWh each comes out to 80 kWh. While that is a great number for the passenger vehicles that Romeo presumably designed these modules for, it isn't nearly enough for a semi truck. The Tre needs 720 kWh--9 times as much!

So they need 72 Hermes modules. But they can't just put them in series or the voltage will be 7200 Volts, far too much to be safe in an EV. So it is impossible to properly design a battery pack using these modules, and Nikola was forced to improperly design one. VERY improperly.

There is one other way to connect battery cells, and this is the "parallel strings" method. In this method, you connect your groups in series to get your voltage, and then connect THOSE strings in parallel to get your capacity. THIS IS A REALLY BAD IDEA AND SHOULDN'T BE DONE.

If anything goes wrong with one of the parallel strings, the other strings can rapidly feed electricity into it, causing catastrophic failure of the pack or even fire. You have to have extra fuses, extra switches, extra management system, and exponentially more exotic software.

All of this extra complexity causes more failure points that can result in the loss of the vehicle. Not doing parallel strings is one of the first things you learn as a battery designer. There are any number of articles cautioning against it.

https://www.orionbms.com/manuals/pdf/parallel_strings.pdf

The thing is, on rare occassions people might parallel two strings and be super careful with their BMS and safety circuits. BUT NO ONE WOULD EVER PARALLEL 9 STRINGS, THIS IS INSANE.

But Nikola has no choice because they don't know how to make their own batteries.
 
Last edited:
Do you remember images of "Nikola batteries" for TRE. They are actually from Romeo Power. And design is quit awful according to Nikola Insider (I copied the whole text here coz twitter threads are sometimes hard to follow or even link back to):

https://twitter.com/InsiderNikola/status/1308169250851360768
I like your review, in the case of the H2 technology, I would be interested knowing which companies are developing Fuel Cells?

- Ballard Fuel Cells Stack which is used by the major bus manufacturers (New Flyer, Proterra, Van Holl...)

- Surus


- GM and Honda


- Hyundai and Toyota are fully certified to develop and manufacture Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Tanks:




Does anyone know if Nikola Motors has plan to build Fuel Cells or will use Fuel Cells Stack from an external supplier?




Ballard





In US, for the past ten years the majors US bus manufacturers, such as New Flyer, Proterra, Van Holl...,
have been producing Fuel Cells Buses based on the Ballard Fuel Cells Stack.

Does anyone know if Nikola Motors has plan to build Fuel Cells or will use Fuel Cells Stack from an external supplier?
 
Nikola insider needs a refresher in pack architecture. If anything, Tesla has proven that parallelism is not an obstacle per se to quality packs.

Tesla's cells are in parallel at the cell level. The modules themselves are only in series. That's why both the model 3 SR and LR use the same number of modules (4), despite having different number of cells.

The model S 60 and 85 had different numbers of modules, but they also used different motors (and were operating at different voltages).
 
To give you an idea of how little the average investor knows about literally anything, I had a coworker ask me if Nikola is a good investment today.

Today.

I didn’t know how to answer them. I mean, if you even glance at the front page of CNBC once a day, you ought to know about the fraud allegations and the CEO being forced to resign? I really wonder sometimes about the stonk market.
 
One Trevor nugget for you:

"The entire infotainment system is a HTML 5 super computer," Milton said. "That's the standard language for computer programmers around the world, so using it let's us build our own chips. And HTML 5 is very secure. Every component is linked on the data network, all speaking the same language. It's not a bunch of separate systems that somehow still manage to communicate."

What’s Behind the Grille of the New Nikola Hydrogen-Electric Truck
 
If someone would take 9 model 3/Y packs and bolt all high voltage negative terminals together and then do the same to the positive ones, would you still call it "proven parallelism" or "quality pack"?

Bad example. Given that each pack has contactors, a pyro fuse, and every cell is individually fused, that would be pretty safe.

If you are talking paralleling unswitched, unfused, unprotected, high fault current modules that are meant to have external protection, that is a bad idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kbM3