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

How could we NOT have Model 3 production by the end of 2017?

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Interesting. You are welcome to point to these pictures. I guess something will be finalized there, then.

Personally I wonder if Tesla will modernize the DC-AC converter. The last time I read that someone had opened one from a Model S, they found 20+ year-old COTS components. With production in higher numbers one could hope that it will be economical to develop something more compact, (even) cheaper, hopefully with even less loss and perhaps also capable of handling more power.
I don't think there are any pictures of the actual equipment, but this is the picture where it shows them charging through the trunk. You can see the silver car behind the black one with the cable running into the trunk.
Screen Shot 2016-04-20 at 11_21_53 PM.png
 
I hope that if the model 3 is late, Musk doesn't feel the need for a faux launch like he did with the Model X.

I don't see the need to hide the final model 3 exterior until release. If the car isn't ready the end of 2017, Tesla could show pre-production cars, and give tours to journalists of the new lines. As long as the M3 seems real and imminent, people will wait a couple of quarters.

Releasing a couple of hand built M3s to friends and claiming to have met the deadline would be particularly unattractive after the Model X "launch".
 
@Zaphod
Hm, the first public picture of supercharging Model 3 in action? Or does it not count for non-production vehicles?

That reminds me though...

For those history buffs out there, do we know the first public photo of Model S supercharging? How about Model X?

To my knowledge, for Roadsters that picture has yet to be taken. (And may never be.)
 
Well...... not as such. But then again, Tesla has already been through this process with the Roadster, S, and X, so hopefully they have enough experience with it now to see and deal with the potential problems ahead of time.

I'm not saying Tesla should hurry up and rush the process, as it will be extremely important to deliver a high quality Model 3. It just seems like with all they have done already, that at least having the initial production going for Tesla / SpaceX employees to be beta testers should be running before 2017 ends.
They haven't "been" through anything, they're - still - going through production issues on a much smaller run of vehicles. And when/if they get that down, that's hardly sufficient preparation for ramping up output 4-5x. That's like saying any skilled home cook could step into a busy restaurant kitchen and start sending out dishes without a hitch - cooking is cooking, right?
 
They haven't "been" through anything, they're - still - going through production issues on a much smaller run of vehicles. And when/if they get that down, that's hardly sufficient preparation for ramping up output 4-5x. That's like saying any skilled home cook could step into a busy restaurant kitchen and start sending out dishes without a hitch - cooking is cooking, right?
Good analogy, but not quite. Home cook stepping into restaurant kitchen was roadster to S. S/X to 3 is more like restaurant chef going to cater a meal for 1200 people. They already know how to do restaurant volume, now they have to simplify so they can crank out catering volume.

PS, and before someone jumps on me, yes I have run restaurants.
 
Interesting. You are welcome to point to these pictures. I guess something will be finalized there, then.

Personally I wonder if Tesla will modernize the DC-AC converter. The last time I read that someone had opened one from a Model S, they found 20+ year-old COTS components. With production in higher numbers one could hope that it will be economical to develop something more compact, (even) cheaper, hopefully with even less loss and perhaps also capable of handling more power.


You are talking about this article:

In a Tesla model S, there is no IGBT packaging trick.

Modern is not necessarily better. Tesla is using tough, older IGBT's (TO-247) that are possibly easier to cool and cheaper.
 
Actually, we don't know this. The refreshes of the Model S and the refreshes of the production lines occurred in the past and we don't know the internal schedules. Since the Model S is the first time they ever built anything at Fremont and the Model X represents a lot of new technology that has never been done in a production passenger vehicle, therefore those two instances might not be very instructive. The reconfiguration of the factory production lines twice thus far is much more instructive. The various refreshes of the Model S, including the dual drive upgrade which had plenty of changed parts and the latest cosmetic refresh are far more in line with what the Model 3 represents in terms of delay.

Wrong. Model 3 is not a refresh of an existing car that has already cleared 100 hurdles. It's an all new car and must clear those hurdles all by itself.
 
Wrong. Model 3 is not a refresh of an existing car that has already cleared 100 hurdles. It's an all new car and must clear those hurdles all by itself.
None of us can know the amount of factory, supply chain, etc. knowledge and tooling is transferrable to the 3. I would imagine some things transfer directly, some things are reinventions, and many are in-between. We also don't know how much of the re-tooling and reinvention is already done or underway. For all we know, a corner of the factory could have been doing pilot retooling for 12 months or more. I guess many people love speculation, and that's fine, but let's couch it as speculation vs. absolute fact. What needs to be done is pretty factual: development of car, supply chain, manufacturing process at scale, regulatory, etc. How far they are, what they've learned from past efforts, whether they will make it by what date? Speculation. Personally, I speculate that they have learned a ton from S and X, and are further along than we think, but there will be hiccups they don't expect causing 12 +/- 6 month delay to initial shipments, and push volume delivery into 2019. But that's speculation.
 
None of us can know the amount of factory, supply chain, etc. knowledge and tooling is transferrable to the 3. I would imagine some things transfer directly, some things are reinventions, and many are in-between. We also don't know how much of the re-tooling and reinvention is already done or underway. For all we know, a corner of the factory could have been doing pilot retooling for 12 months or more. I guess many people love speculation, and that's fine, but let's couch it as speculation vs. absolute fact. What needs to be done is pretty factual: development of car, supply chain, manufacturing process at scale, regulatory, etc. How far they are, what they've learned from past efforts, whether they will make it by what date? Speculation. Personally, I speculate that they have learned a ton from S and X, and are further along than we think, but there will be hiccups they don't expect causing 12 +/- 6 month delay to initial shipments, and push volume delivery into 2019. But that's speculation.

If volume delivery is pushed to 2019 Tesla would potentially be finished.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tes LA
If "finished" is sold to Google, then yes. Tesla is a valuable brand and would not go out of business.

Tesla's IP is indeed very valuable but they must demonstrate that they can successfully transform from a low volume boutique manufacturer to a high volume manufacturer that can meet the kind of demand that results in 400K pre-orders. Slipping out 12+ months for volume delivery of their mass market offering would result in a fire-sale on Tesla stock.
 
Wrong. Model 3 is not a refresh of an existing car that has already cleared 100 hurdles. It's an all new car and must clear those hurdles all by itself.

I'm not talking about the number of hurdles. I'm talking about production and technology challenges and how that relates to time tables. Both the S and the X are much harder to develop vehicles for Tesla because Tesla had never mass produced any car with the Model S and the X has many unique technology hurdles. None of that applies to the Model 3. The Model S has had substantial refreshes and the production lines have gone through 2 major revisions including stamping and paint shop that are sized for Model 3 production. As a result, using the Model S and X initial production as metrics for the delays in the Model 3 are very misleading.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: SW2Fiddler
I'm not talking about the number of hurdles. I'm talking about production and technology challenges and how that relates to time tables. Both the S and the X are much harder to develop vehicles for Tesla because Tesla had never mass produced any car with the Model S and the X has many unique technology hurdles. None of that applies to the Model 3. The Model S has had substantial refreshes and the production lines have gone through 2 major revisions including stamping and paint shop that are sized for Model 3 production. As a result, using the Model S and X initial production as metrics for the delays in the Model 3 are very misleading.
I'm an optimist and I tend to agree with you. They have a ton more experience than before. But I believe the real limiter on pace will be less production, but more service and charging infrastructure. If they are shipping 10x number of cars, they will need huge increase in service, which requires broad hiring, acquisition of space, etc.; and broad expansion of supercharging and destination charging. Sometimes those things are limited by local permitting, labor supply, stuff like that. Easier to control Fremont than the rest of the world. Regardless, I see a big success with a few bumps in the road.
 
I'm an optimist and I tend to agree with you. They have a ton more experience than before. But I believe the real limiter on pace will be less production, but more service and charging infrastructure. If they are shipping 10x number of cars, they will need huge increase in service, which requires broad hiring, acquisition of space, etc.; and broad expansion of supercharging and destination charging. Sometimes those things are limited by local permitting, labor supply, stuff like that. Easier to control Fremont than the rest of the world. Regardless, I see a big success with a few bumps in the road.

Actually, I would argue that they just need to build vehicles that need less service. As a simpler vehicle, hopefully the Model 3 has higher initial quality and better long term maintenance than the S and the X. I think they know that.

They aren't shipping 10x the number of cars immediately. The cadence is more like:
2015: 50k
2016: 80k
2017: 115k
2018: 200k
2019: 350k
2020: 500k

Let's say they build even a constant rate of 100 Superchargers in the U.S. per year:
2014: 50 -> 152
2015: 152 -> 265
2016: 265 -> 365
2017: 365 -> 465
2018: 465 -> 565
2019: 565 -> 665
2020: 665 -> 765

That's almost tripling the number of Superchargers we have today, and that's just a linear 100 per year. Instead, they are spending about 5% of capex, and so as they make money and capex increases, the number increases per year. Of course, they are also expanding the size of each site.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Luke42 and TaoJones
Tesla doesn't make every component itself. They are inexperienced with managing a supply chain of this scale. Some production will undoubtedly happen in late 2017, but the scale may not hit Tesla's initial or desired projections. The problems are supply chain, inexperience, and scale.
 
  • Like
Reactions: voip-ninja