Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Standard rule applies. If there's a question in the article's title, then the answer to that question is no.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Standard rule applies. If there's a question in the article's title, then the answer to that question is no.
Waiting4M3
Active Member
My rule is never click on an article that has a question in the headline.
The numbers on the board in Fremont would likely reflect the rate on that line or at Fremont. The bottleneck could be Giga 1. Of course, the friend could be full of bull as well. Tough to speculate from behind a computer.
I am still trying to find out what is going on with the third shift for Model 3. Were they always working 24/7 on the Model 3 line?
Tesla Adds 3rd Shift To Model 3 Production In Push To 6,000 Vehicles/Week Run Rate | CleanTechnica
Edit: From Elon's letter - "As part of the drive towards 6k, all Model 3 production at Fremont will move to 24/7 operations. This means that we will be adding another shift to general assembly, body and paint. Please refer anyone you know who you think meets the Tesla bar for talent, drive and trust. Between Fremont and Giga, Tesla will be adding about 400 people per week for several weeks."
The timing associated with the additional shift is a very important factor here. Is the third shift in operation now and what got the numbers to 3.5k or is a third shift about to come online? If the shift has not been brought online then a 5k rate should easily be achievable. If the shift has started and was the driving factor in the recent increase in production rate then there should be some concern.
Last edited:
ruralectric
Member
Sure. But I consider Politico to be a credible news organization. Perhaps it would have been better to post in the Market Action thread, but nonetheless useful to know what is being put out there. I was surprised.
callmesam
Member
Huh? Politico is a right-wing rag funded by ULA and Frackers.
colettimj
Member
The Manhattan Institute "seeks to develop and promote free-market ideas". Explains the tone of the article.
As often the assumption they put into their analysis are simply not accurate and misleading and facts are inaccurate or used in a wrong context. Secondly they are not well informed about energy prices for EVs and confuse them with energy prices for households. Thirdly they don't mention people who either use the Tesla Network including free charging at SC as well as how green or not green that energy from Chargers really is. Fourth, they compare EVs against claims from the ICE makers how clean their new ICE cars are. Which ones? The bottom line they make that a ICE car is more clean while driving than an EV is against all facts. I could continue....
If you read at the bottom this is a consulting company that did that analysis. Someone had to pay for this work. Ask yourself always who did pay and why something has been released to the media ...
Reciprocity
Active Member
Given 45 days, another shutdown and 2 bottlenecks identified to be something software can solve.. yeah, I would agree. I would also be fine with getting over 4k sustained given that 25w x 4k/w = 100,000 high margin, P, D and White interior cars in the second half of the year as a minimum.
Reciprocity
Active Member
I would assume they would just OT to do so even if they didnt have all the people hired/trained. But more then likely its not running at full capacity 24x7 until everyone is hired, trained and has some hours under their belts.
MartinAustin
Active Member
I was thinking this, too. Let's say these are the daily production numbers:
549
542
598
627
654
639
681
You can see several days above 600 (600x7=4200) but Elon could not say "over 600 per day."
He can say "7 days over 500 per day" without misleading.
However, the total for the week adds up to 4,290.
We could be closer to 600 per day than anyone realises... and 4,000 per week could already be reality.
Well tbh Elon numbers aren't renowned for being conservative, I doubt he would say 500/day if we're already close to 600/day.
MartinAustin
Active Member
dmckinstry
Model X 2019
I can't find the original quote right now, but IIRC he said something like "500 per day in all zones". I don't know how to interpret that, but it could mean 500 per day on all lines, but higher in the currently fastest line.
bdy0627
Active Member
Looks like the Bloomberg tracker is estimating production reasonably well in general.
Per Electrek, Elon stated “It is looking quite likely that we will exceed 500 vehicles per day across all Model 3 production zones this week.”
So it's possible they built more than 4000 this week, if the zones not operating at that speed were not during general assembly (i.e. they were in GF1 or similar) and they had stockpiled enough parts before hand to perform what amounts to a week-long "burst" rate (and subsequently had to slow down as they dried up their stockpile and the slow zones production rate became a bottleneck again)
Elon then says in the email “We got just in the last 24 hours at the Gigafactory managed to achieve a sustained rate of over 3,000 packs per week, and actually reached a peak hour with extrapolated outward would be a rate of about 5,000 cars per week.”
This implies that pack production is still a bottleneck, and that the new much talked about (until recently) Grohmann line is still not running at full speed (because then they should have something in the neighborhood of 5k/week production combined). Might not even be running at all yet, could be they've just managed to get their pre-Grohmann battery production lines cranking out just a bit more...
One thing I wonder is when the email was sent - the article on Electrek doesn't say when it was sent, just that they obtained it today. So if you're really optimistic you might hope that the email was from a prior week and that they are solidly at 4000+/wk now and the leaked productions numbers are real. As much as I would like that to be real, I suspect that the less positive scenario of stockpiled parts used to perform a week long "burst" at general / final assembly managed to kick out that many cars is more likely, with bottlenecks preventing it from being continuous. It's also possible the leaked production numbers were simply just not true...
So it's possible they built more than 4000 this week, if the zones not operating at that speed were not during general assembly (i.e. they were in GF1 or similar) and they had stockpiled enough parts before hand to perform what amounts to a week-long "burst" rate (and subsequently had to slow down as they dried up their stockpile and the slow zones production rate became a bottleneck again)
Elon then says in the email “We got just in the last 24 hours at the Gigafactory managed to achieve a sustained rate of over 3,000 packs per week, and actually reached a peak hour with extrapolated outward would be a rate of about 5,000 cars per week.”
This implies that pack production is still a bottleneck, and that the new much talked about (until recently) Grohmann line is still not running at full speed (because then they should have something in the neighborhood of 5k/week production combined). Might not even be running at all yet, could be they've just managed to get their pre-Grohmann battery production lines cranking out just a bit more...
One thing I wonder is when the email was sent - the article on Electrek doesn't say when it was sent, just that they obtained it today. So if you're really optimistic you might hope that the email was from a prior week and that they are solidly at 4000+/wk now and the leaked productions numbers are real. As much as I would like that to be real, I suspect that the less positive scenario of stockpiled parts used to perform a week long "burst" at general / final assembly managed to kick out that many cars is more likely, with bottlenecks preventing it from being continuous. It's also possible the leaked production numbers were simply just not true...
MartinAustin
Active Member
Yes.
“It is looking quite likely that we will exceed 500 vehicles per day across all Model 3 production zones this week.”
Cell production, pack production, motor/drivetrain production, transporting from GF1 to Fremont, stamping, BIW, paint, seats, other components made inside Fremont, other components coming in from outside suppliers, final assembly and marriage, lining them up in the parking lot, loading onto trains & trucks, etc. etc. - all likely exceeding 500 per day.
MartinAustin
Active Member
Harder to say that exactly... they can produce a maximum of 5,000/week without the Grohmann line, they said that during the call (or in the ER). The Grohmann line is more automated and simply reduces the number of staff required to make the 5,000/week - thus, it is less costly. But it won't go faster than 5,000/week yet.
I wonder if the "Grohmann line," as it is designed & built today, will never be able to produce more than 5,000/week. I suspect that their push from 5,000 to 10,000/week will be accomplished by installing another line. Don't forget that GF1 is only one-third built, and they have already described it as having multiple identical "production lines." The pilot line could be considered complete when it is reliably producing 5,000/week. After that they put in another set of everything to get it up to 10,000/week. Does this make sense?
I don't think they have enough room to stockpile excess produced parts from areas/processes of the factory that are going faster than the next area/process. As they improve, the following area/process would then have to not only catch up with its input areas, but surpass them, in order to absorb the stockpiled stuff (or the input processes slow down). And finally, the slowest area/process kinda dictates the speed of overall production, even if the following areas/processes could go faster - they simply run out of materials to work with, because they're waiting for the slower input departments. This is exactly what Elon has said on many occasions - production goes at the speed of the slowest or least-lucky department.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article
