Off Shore
Off Topic Member
Given the plot line of Iron Man Two I would assume it's inevitable.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Given the plot line of Iron Man Two I would assume it's inevitable.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I can see a whole series of bear articles coming from this video. He was quite negative about the body construction, saying it was needlessly complex, odd combinations of materials, and heavier than it needed to be. He was also negative about Tesla's reliance on automation and of course tolerances. I can only hope they got some early models which slipped through QC.
sundaymorning
Active Member
Today we reached 500 open Supercharger sites in North America. Way to go Tesla!!!
www.supercharge.info
...and 40 new Supercharger sites under simultaneously construction by crews right now
...and 42 new site locations in various stages of permitting. WOW
This is pretty cool but I’d love to see Tesla slow down the SC progress a bit and get to cash flow ASAP. I mean 500 is pretty darn SOLID for the time being.
sundaymorning
Active Member
Bears will always find something negative to say. What’s important for Tesla is that they continue to command attention from various entities willing to study and validate their technology. It’s doubtful that average person/buyer cares much about complexity or weight, it’s definitly a win of an article for Tesla in that they validate Tesla’s tech. Every new car that Tesla brings to the market will be a learning curve for them, even with certain nuisances, they are still way ahead of competitors in design and EV manufacturing. Continual coverages such as these types of articles will inevitably find its way to a tech savvy buyer, the type who doesn’t care about weight/manufacturing.
Maybe slow down deploying extra SC's in California. We still have holes to fill like I-10 / I-20 east of the I-10/I-20 split. Pecos has been in permit stage for 166 days and Fort Stockton for 505 days! There's a few other holes that need filling too.
I wonder why Tesla don’t change their contractors? Seems like it’s been creating an issue for them from the beginning.
The Semi in Sparks would make a lot of sense. They already make the Model 3 motors there, IIRC, as well as the batteries (both to be used for the semi)... and they want to use the semis to carry parts from Sparks to Fremont. Each semi will roll off the line and immediately be filled with batteries destined for Fremont
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Tech savvy buyers seem like the type who would care about weight and manufacturing details. That's technology. If it's true that Tesla built a more complex and heavier than needed body for the 3 that would go against the mantra of efficient and easy manufacturing and keeping costs down.
It is complex, with multiple different types of steel. I suspect it's not "heavier than needed"; I suspect the extra weight is to maintain that 5 star safety rating in every category. I doubt the guy claiming it's heavier than needed has thought about the details of all the crash tests.
Waiting4M3
Active Member
The guy who got the email from Anton Walhman, the youngest one on the panel, seemed to me that he didn't know what NVidia is, didn't even know how to pronounce it. These guys have no clue about technology.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
He certainly seems credible with a lot of experience in the field, and he specifically said that he saw no increase in strength from layering of those materials over a simpler use of the appropriate material.
sundaymorning
Active Member
I don’t think building the perfect car in every aspect is possible, yet. Elon stated during the previous CC that there are a few things Tesla has learned from building Model 3 that will be done differently in Model Y, for even better manufacturing and efficiency. So there are always room for improvement as we move along. In the end, I think buyers will look at the battery range as well as performance specs. Maybe I’m a minority but weight was not a consideration when I bought my S, the range was what I was concerned about.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Remember that weight affects range to some degree, and handling. And for the Model 3 if it's being built in a more complex manner than is needed that affects cost.
Waiting4M3
Active Member
My impression is that Monro and the interview panel had very low opinion of automation and any changes that Tesla want to do to manufacturing. Monro mentioned several times how GM bought robots but couldn't figure out how to use them, so he just went in and ripped the robots out and did things manually. He seemed very proud of that. And the whole panel was basically laughing at Tesla's production quality and ramp target the whole show. Monro referred to robot as blind, one-armed idiot. I don't think he knows what computer vision and sensors can do these days.
What struck me as kind of ironic is that at ~ 18 min mark in the video Monro was quoting SunTzu about how one needs to know thy enemy, and can not just dismiss them, in order to win the battle, he said "if I see someone come in and boast and pound their chest and say 'let me tell you a little about...' they are not going to make it". Then he proceed to do that basically over the whole show how he and the existing industry people know everything about manufacturing and Tesla is doing it wrong. He also went on to bash the Chinese car makers on how they're getting manufacturing wrong. I'm not saying that Tesla has gotten it all figured out or that this Monro guy doesn't know what he's talking about, but his attitude seems to be the exact reason why traditional automakers are doomed. Tesla and Chinese car makers will keep trying and will eventually get it right, while the Detroit old hands will just rest on their laurels until they die.
The body design, the supposed "redundant" pieces and added weight seems to be the only design issue. Everything else is related to manufacturing, such as the examples brought up in the show, panel gap, and putting in sound deadening piece in the door backwards, I think Tesla can fix them.
Last edited:
sundaymorning
Active Member
Here’s how I interpret Sandy’s assessment.
1. He likely got an earlier M3, which had some inconsistent panel gaps. Which is a fair criticism if the model he received was an earlier built. We saw these same types of problems in early MS and MX, both cars eventually got passed their earlier built quality issues and Tesla was able to ramp with more consistency. Having own an earlier model S myself, I did not have any issues with panel gaps in my car. I also have several friends who own Tesla’s, no complain from them neither. To me this is an easy issue to iron out and Tesla might have already passed the initial stages of panel gap teething issues. I’m also seeing very satisfied M3 owners and very few panel gap complaints on the M3 forum, YouTube reviews, etc. as time progresses.
2. Tesla’s battery and overall technology is far and ahead everyone else, Sandy thinks they surpassed all competitors including BMW, LG chem, Samsung, etc. hands down no contest. “Ignore Tesla’s batteries and tech. at your own peril.” This is the most important component of the interview to me.
3. Here’s where I would ding Sandy for his assessment. He admits that the suspension is one of the best he’s seen in the industry “F1 prince” was the term he used to describe Tesla’s suspension design. However, although he criticized Tesla for not using standardized components to build the suspension, yet he managed to praise Tesla for having one of the best suspensions in the industry. This sounds to me like someone who hasn’t really understood the overall design/functionality of the M3? Maybe Tesla could build it lighter, who knows, what counts is that he’s super impressed by the suspension.
4. Robotics. He may or may not be correct about robotics being “too dumb” to complete certain tasks. This might be where software can give Tesla an advantage. Although he’s competent, I think he’s the type of guy to throw judgement before learning from others. He reminds me of Bob Lutz, the guy who said “the Falcon wing is unmanufacturable.” Or “They can’t do it like that...” etc. and here’s the kicker, he hasn’t seen the M3 line yet and is guessing along the way.
5. Weight: he criticizes the weight of the M3 body, but neglects the safety rating of what this potential weight can yield in a safety crash test. I would wait until the M3 goes through safety testing before passing judgement on weight. He also admitted he doesn’t know “about crash worthiness” of the M3 build. “It’s different than anything I’ve ever seen, there’s panels and I don’t know why they’re there...” was his exact quote. To be fair, this might be a learning curve for Tesla as well. But I’m betting there’s a reason behind those panels. He thinks “maybe they hired someone who thinks they need to run the car over with a tank.” Well maybe, Elon designed it to be THE safest car, ill wait for NHTSA on this one.
6. He thinks the M3 is a “magnificent sexy” car. He seems to be very impressed with the tech, and think the Detroit boys are in trouble if they ignore the technology. “This is not the let’s get the boys to roll up their sleeves” [to beat Tesla], “this is not that type of rolling up your sleeves, we saw components we’ve never seen before” in the processor. It’s going to take Detroit a lot of time, effort and money to catch up.
In short, I think the panel gap issue is an easy fix. Robotics might not be as easy, but we’re witnessimg the M3 ramp happening now, so Tesla’s doing something right and Sandy should really visit Nummi before passing judgment. He did acknowledge that he can’t figure out how Tesla put their batteries together to perfection. So there’s clearly robotic components/software he hasn’t seen yet. This is likely going to be Tesla’s moat.
Last edited:
btw. he criticized Volvo guy in that part, the famously safe brand ^ ^
In the King interview Musk admitted (IMO) that he made the same mistake in the so-called machine that builds the machine that he made in the X, to much complicated stuff at once
btw2. did Munro imply at the begginig that the ancient stuff in south america was built be aliens?
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Considering Elon's recent statements about robotics I think he would agree with Sandy. Elon has backed away from the fully automated factory concept in a very big way. The super factory machine was supposed to revolutionize car building, now they are throwing more people at the problem. I see this as a major setback for Tesla.
IANNA, ICAN were important for IPv4, not so much for IPv6. Welcome to the galactic network.
Whois was important for DNS. As someone with personal info in whois, I welcome proection of personal details if it doesn't compromise accounability (of organizations and or individuals of content.)
As a self proclaimed nerd, i prefered state.pa.us DNS suffix to visitpa.com and pa.gov, but marketing always wins. ;-)
These former things were important plumbing to bootstrap the Internet.
IETF remains vauluable clearinghouse for interoperability standards. Why cant we fix chat already?
DNSSEC can make the notion of human readable site names irrelevant especially when everyone starts with search: google, bing, duckduckgo, ...
GDPR 'appropriately' deals with content of the pipes.
No problem if search is just an index to current content.
How does this relate to "wayback machine" content?
Edit:typos
Last edited:
Disagree. Pace of automation is what has changed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Article
