jhm
Well-Known Member
If one Supercharge really reduces the cycle life by 20, then 50 supercharge cycles would consume the battery. There is no evidence that this is happening.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hydrogen is the future, not battery-electric cars: Lexus | CarAdvice
This sounds like BS. Do we have some authoritative source to set the matter straight? Thanks
Or the battery has 20000 charges and the point is moot. I've supercharged my battery probably more than 50 times and I've seen hardly any change on it. If you supercharge it at much greater speed than 1C than yes you damage the battery. The issue I'm guessing is the Toyota guy is thinking of dumping 135kW into a 8kW Toyota battery which WILL reduce its longevity. Especially if they don't have adequate cooling, which Tesla does but I'm not sure about the Prime f.inst.If one Supercharge really reduces the cycle life by 20, then 50 supercharge cycles would consume the battery. There is no evidence that this is happening.
Hydrogen is the future, not battery-electric cars: Lexus | CarAdvice
This sounds like BS. Do we have some authoritative source to set the matter straight? Thanks
Hydrogen is the future, not battery-electric cars: Lexus | CarAdvice
This sounds like BS. Do we have some authoritative source to set the matter straight? Thanks
Didn't Tesloop get 200K miles on the original pack, with a lot of supercharging? Not to mention Prof Dahn's work showing that faster charging speeds, up to a point, might actually be better than slow charging since it reduces the time spent charging and the possibility for negative side reactions. And finally, there are already lithium ion chemistries which can charge in 5-10 minutes, LiTiO and LiFePO4.
He's short. He admits it in the article.Forbes published a hit piece by a guy who appears to be a short seller but interestingly enough the disclosure just says he “may have positions in the securities mentioned in this article.”
Really nasty business — surprised that Forbes published trash like this, although I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by anything at this point. Short sellers seem increasingly desperate with the Model 3 coming out.
Tesla Shareholders: Are You Drunk On Elon Musk's Kool-Aid?
Wall Street makes brothels look like churches when it comes to ethics.
Forbes published a hit piece by a guy who appears to be a short seller but interestingly enough the disclosure just says he “may have positions in the securities mentioned in this article.”
Really nasty business — surprised that Forbes published trash like this, although I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by anything at this point. Short sellers seem increasingly desperate with the Model 3 coming out.
Tesla Shareholders: Are You Drunk On Elon Musk's Kool-Aid?
What exactly did the WSJ say about "hammering out" Model 3s? It has sparked not only this kind of outrage but by my count at least 7 or 8 ambulance-chaser press releases seeking "injured" shareholders.
You used to be able to get a free WSJ preview article by googling the exact title, but they shut that down. And not only do I not want to expend the money for a subscription, more important, I don't want to give it to News Corp and the Murdochs.
Maybe someone here could past an excerpt of a key paragraph? Selective quoting is not copyright infringement.
Unknown to analysts, investors and the hundreds of thousands of customers who signed up to buy it, as recently as early September major portions of the Model 3 were still being banged out by hand, away from the automated production line, according to people familiar with the matter.
While the car’s production began in early July, the advanced assembly line Tesla has boasted of building still wasn’t fully ready as of a few weeks ago, the people said. Tesla’s factory workers had been piecing together parts of the cars in a special area while the company feverishly worked to finish the machinery designed to produce Model 3’s at a rate of thousands a week, the people said.
[...]
One worker who spent time in the Model 3 shop—dubbed by some as Area 51 because of the limited access and secretive nature—described watching young workers in September struggling to move large pieces of steel to weld together instead of using robots as is traditionally the case.
“In place of the robots...you’ve got two associates lining up with a big, old spot welder hanging from the ceiling by a chain, and you’ve got one associate kind of like balancing it and trying to get the welder in position, and you’ve got another welder with his arm guiding it,” this worker recalled seeing. “Sparks go flying.”
Thanks! Doesn't sound great, but that's probably over a month ago at this point. I originally didn't expect they'd ship more than a few of them this year, so even if they don't get to 5000/wk in December it's a win from my perspective.
Given the source (hahahaha, what source: i.e. "people familiar with the matter", Daily Kanban...), I'm actually not willing to believe it's true.I agree. WSJ is consistently anti-Tesla and anti-renewables, so they put the heaviest slant possible on their reporting. Even if true (and I'm ready to believe it was true at the beginning of September), it's in the past and most likely not relevant anymore.
Actually, the numbers you chose to copy came from mostly the Nikola website, not Donn Bailey's article. You should be clear about who you are asking for answers and is not responding.author is Donn Bailey whom is presently short TSLA via long term options,