Buddyroe
Active Member
Aww, is this your way of saying you were wrong with your statement that a Roadster is just a Lotus? I'm pretty sure that was the statement I was responding to. But I'll play.
Lotus shipped the gliders to Tesla in Menlo Park. The cars were hand assembled there (and another location previous to that). Yes, they *even* built them. No, they didn't have the factory in Fremont at that point in time - and they didn't have robots either. But it would be a mistake to think they didn't gain any experience.
I'm not trying to "play" any games or have a "way" of saying anything? I'm simply trying to carry on a conversation and I replied respectfully to your comment. I don't claim to being right 100% of the time, and am definitely happy to learn something new. Just like I don't gloat when I am right (unlike some posters - um-hum).
Nonetheless, I will now reply to the sensible and thread-pertinent portion of your comment.
Here is what I said in response to the poster who said Tesla has no excuse for building crappy cars because they now have 10 years of experience:
"So tell me this. When did Tesla manufacture it's first car? And what car did they manufacture 10 years ago? You tell me that, and if I can confirm it, I will be in total agreement with you." (you see - I was open to being wrong). But, I still don't think assembling 2450 cars means they "manufactured" the Roadster. Here are the definitions of manufacture:
1. make (something) on a large scale using machinery (2450 is a large scale?).
2. invent or fabricate
I still hold that Tesla did not manufacture the Roadster, they merely assembled it. That was the point of the conversation you jumped into mid-stream.
Nonetheless, I take it you agree that Tesla should be able to build a much better car than they current do because of the experience they have gained building the S and X, as well as the Roadster? (again, that was the point of the conversation)