Tiger
Active Member
Tesla salaries seem to be on a wide scale https://www.comparably.com/companies/tesla-motors/salaries
Are production associates staffed hourly positions or salaried with stock compensation?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model 3 Highland Performance/Plaid Speculation [Car announced 04.23.2024]
- Thread starter Daniel L
- Start date
Tesla salaries seem to be on a wide scale https://www.comparably.com/companies/tesla-motors/salaries
Are production associates staffed hourly positions or salaried with stock compensation?
Wait, is this a California problem, or an America problem? Those are very, very different stoires, contexts, and dogwhistles.
It is for sure weird now non-productive those Californians are. Designing whole electric cars and rockets from the ground up and having a GDP per Capita that makes other states such as Colorado blush, much less other countries, all while being lazy and unmotivated.
Or by "American Workers" do you just mean blue collar factory workers, not engineers, finance, and other labor?
Seriously? You question if Elon Musk, who suddenly became an anti-COVID, anti-VAXX full right Republican the instant it looked like he'd be forced by the state to prioritize his factory worker's health over his profits, is in endless fights over Unions, and took his toys and moved to TX to live the libertarian dream of raining concrete chunks on his neighbors hires the cheapest workers? The same Elon who praises Chinese assembly workers for working unpaid overtime so that Tesla stock can go up? Is that really the future you want for your kids no matter where you live?
Or we could just leave the unfounded identity politics out of this discussion.
Last edited:
I mean, you could look this up yourself in one google search. But you already know that no american assembly line worker is paid salary as that would be completely illegal unless they were making $150K+ a year as a highly compensated employee. Have you been paying attention to any of the UAW negotiations? Have you ever heard pay rates as salary? Salary vs hourly is not a choice, it's based on the autonomy of the worker, which factory workers do not have.
To be clear- that is $46,000 a year, which is about half the poverty line in Alameda County.
Of course, they don't tell you how big the stock awards are, and Tesla is quetly removing stock awards even for salaried workers, so they don't actually exist even if the job description says they do:
Tesla Nixes Merit-Based Stock Awards Even With Shares Doubling In 2023
The EV giant won't hand out merit-based equity awards for salaried staff this year.
www.investors.com
Tesla removes stock-based compensation this year, report says
Tesla has reportedly decided not to give stock-based compensation to employees as part of their annual performance review. CEO Elon...
electrek.co
Last edited:
Gauss Guzzler
Safety Score = 42
As much as I agree with the issues of poverty and concrete chunks raining from the sky, it’s hard to criticize Tesla’s salaries from the perspective that businesses should be able to respond to standard supply & demand principles within the framework of the law.
Tesla plopped 50,000 jobs onto California out of thin air and had no trouble filling them all to make Fremont the most productive auto factory in America. Clearly there’s no worker supply shortage.
Nor are the working conditions significantly worse than other low wage companies. Tesla doesn’t have a “captive audience” like Detroit does. Those 50,000 workers are free to flip burgers or greet Wal-Mart shoppers if they’re being mistreated by Tesla.
Don’t criticize Tesla for this, criticize the government for promoting the wealth gap system that puts $46k in poverty. Criticize employers who create and exploit regional workforce monopolies, like Wal-Mart or some of the automakers operating in flyover states. Tesla has done the opposite by building factories in populated areas despite the higher labor and overhead costs.
Tesla plopped 50,000 jobs onto California out of thin air and had no trouble filling them all to make Fremont the most productive auto factory in America. Clearly there’s no worker supply shortage.
Nor are the working conditions significantly worse than other low wage companies. Tesla doesn’t have a “captive audience” like Detroit does. Those 50,000 workers are free to flip burgers or greet Wal-Mart shoppers if they’re being mistreated by Tesla.
Don’t criticize Tesla for this, criticize the government for promoting the wealth gap system that puts $46k in poverty. Criticize employers who create and exploit regional workforce monopolies, like Wal-Mart or some of the automakers operating in flyover states. Tesla has done the opposite by building factories in populated areas despite the higher labor and overhead costs.
You brought this argument out of thin air. The only argument brought before was that "Tesla doesn't pay top wages and thus doesn't get top people" - which you seem to agree with - and "Californians/Americans don't like to work" - which has nothing to do with pay or mistreatment, just supposed laziness.
Nobody said their pay was illegal, unethical, not beneficial to the area, etc. Just that they don't pay what is required to recruit and retain top talent in manufacturing and quality control of their cars in the Fremont factory.
The fun argument was also made that American workers are lazy and unmotiviated, which is why turnover is so high at Tesla, yet these people are going and finding other jobs, which seems like a lot of work and the complete opposite of lazy and unmotivated, and seems more like people searching out a better situation.
Factory. Not factories. And you mean "buying an existing shuttered car factory for pennies on the dollar" not "building."
Pretty sure Elon thinks this was a mistake long term and is doing his very best to move to flyover states for everything going forward. This is an acident of history as this lazy, woke environment of the failed state of CA is where Elon made all his previous money, it was a singular opprutunity with the NUMMI plant to get a carmaker going the first time at a massive discount, and was also a result of his previous belief system, not a core philosophy of Tesla currently or in the future.
Last edited:
Can we move the stereotyping and over generalizing to another thread? It has nothing to do with the particular topic of this thread.
Here is my speculation about the upcoming Model 3 Performance/Ludicrous.
A lot of people have speculated on how quick the Model 3 Performance can get with upgraded motors. Most people think it needs 3 Plaid motors to be substantially quicker. It doesn’t and this post will show you exactly why that is true.
I have over 100 1/4 mile passes logged with track slips, the Dragy, and my 2022 Model 3 Performance. I tested the car after every single modification I did so I know how much each modification improved the car.
I was able to compare all of my results to the motor matchup website and surprisingly the website accurately predicted my times with each modification almost down to the hundredth of a second and fraction of a mile an hour.
With that knowledge I can use the website to predict what would happen if the front and rear motors were modified.
The site uses 309 HP and 310 LB FT for the rear motor and 199 HP and 200 LB FT for the front motor. However, both of those motors fall off in HP above 5,300 rpms which is about 55 mph.
I started with a car that has my modifications and all I did was force the HP to remain flat for just the rear motor. Up to about 55 mph the car would be the same. However, after that it would maintain peak HP till the top speed.
If you just had a flat HP rear motor and the stock front motor with my other modifications then the 1/4 mile time would go from 11.17 @ 120.0 mph to 10.99 @ 124.7 mph. That doesn’t change the peak HP either. It just maintains the max HP longer.
If I make both motors maintain peak HP then the 1/4 mile could be done in 10.87 @ 128.3 mph.
However, if I just substitute in the rear motor from the current Model S LR then the 1/4 mile would go down to 10.67 @ 130.4 mph.
Finally if I just substitute in both Model S LR motors which are only about 25 HP more than the current Model 3 Performance rear motor then the 1/4 mile could go all the way down to 9.79 @ 140.9 mph with just two motors.
Do you honestly still think the Model 3 Performance will get 3 Plaid motors? It would be unusable especially on the wheels and tires that the Model 3 would use.
I do believe that there will be an upgraded 2024 Model 3 Performance/Ludicrous and I believe it will be deserving of the Ludicrous name. However, I do think it could be launched later in 2024 even if the Highland RWD and LR are released in Q1.
My prediction is 10.4 @ 129 mph for the 1/4 mile and 2.6 for 0-60 mph with rollout subtracted.
Here is my speculation about the upcoming Model 3 Performance/Ludicrous.
A lot of people have speculated on how quick the Model 3 Performance can get with upgraded motors. Most people think it needs 3 Plaid motors to be substantially quicker. It doesn’t and this post will show you exactly why that is true.
I have over 100 1/4 mile passes logged with track slips, the Dragy, and my 2022 Model 3 Performance. I tested the car after every single modification I did so I know how much each modification improved the car.
I was able to compare all of my results to the motor matchup website and surprisingly the website accurately predicted my times with each modification almost down to the hundredth of a second and fraction of a mile an hour.
With that knowledge I can use the website to predict what would happen if the front and rear motors were modified.
The site uses 309 HP and 310 LB FT for the rear motor and 199 HP and 200 LB FT for the front motor. However, both of those motors fall off in HP above 5,300 rpms which is about 55 mph.
I started with a car that has my modifications and all I did was force the HP to remain flat for just the rear motor. Up to about 55 mph the car would be the same. However, after that it would maintain peak HP till the top speed.
If you just had a flat HP rear motor and the stock front motor with my other modifications then the 1/4 mile time would go from 11.17 @ 120.0 mph to 10.99 @ 124.7 mph. That doesn’t change the peak HP either. It just maintains the max HP longer.
If I make both motors maintain peak HP then the 1/4 mile could be done in 10.87 @ 128.3 mph.
However, if I just substitute in the rear motor from the current Model S LR then the 1/4 mile would go down to 10.67 @ 130.4 mph.
Finally if I just substitute in both Model S LR motors which are only about 25 HP more than the current Model 3 Performance rear motor then the 1/4 mile could go all the way down to 9.79 @ 140.9 mph with just two motors.
Do you honestly still think the Model 3 Performance will get 3 Plaid motors? It would be unusable especially on the wheels and tires that the Model 3 would use.
I do believe that there will be an upgraded 2024 Model 3 Performance/Ludicrous and I believe it will be deserving of the Ludicrous name. However, I do think it could be launched later in 2024 even if the Highland RWD and LR are released in Q1.
My prediction is 10.4 @ 129 mph for the 1/4 mile and 2.6 for 0-60 mph with rollout subtracted.
Attachments
All I know is that I've been ready for quite some time to purchase a replacement for my 2020 M3P, but I have zero intention of doing so until the updated M3P is available. I've thought about just getting an S plaid, but I don't want/need a bigger vehicle.
Best,
Best,
For everyone asking for a single Plaid motor in the rear, this is why that isn’t a good idea.
I setup a simulation of what would happen if we raced a Model 3 Performance with just a single Plaid motor(340 max HP) at the rear with no other changes against a Model 3 Performance with a single Model S LR motor(329 HP max) at the rear and a Model 3 motor up front that holds max HP(199 HP) all the way to redline. I also included a stock Model 3 Performance. Here are the results.
The car with the Plaid motor would do 0-60 mph in 2.78 and the LR motor car would do it in 2.89 seconds. Just over .1 seconds difference but that may matter to some people.
However, when we look at the 1/4 mile times we see that the Plaid motor car is doing 10.90 seconds vs. the LR motor car’s 10.95 seconds. The really interesting thing is that the LR motor car is doing 127.5 mph vs. the 125.8 mph of the Plaid motor car.
The LR car is pulling much harder up top because the front motor of that car pulls constant HP all the way to redline.
There is so much more room for improvement in the front motor of the Model 3 Performance over the rear motor. If you just focus on rear motor changes you will miss out on a ton of performance.
Also look at the power draw for the 1/4 mile race. At most these cars would pull 10% more power from the battery over a stock Model 3 Performance at peak HP and about 17% more energy over the 1/4 mile.
The peak power for these upgraded cars really isn’t that much more than stock. It probably wouldn’t require a significantly different battery unless additional cooling was required.
If you want a much better 0-60 mph then yes throw a Plaid motor on the rear and that will get you a tenth over the LR motor car with the constant power front motor.
However, if what you really want is a better 60-130 mph time then you really should just concentrate on having both motors hold constant HP all the way to redline. I believe they can do that without using Plaid motors at all and without increasing cost dramatically.
I like to go fast as much as the next person, but how many people out there do you think would pay the cost delta to get "constant power" from 60-130? I suspect that's a vanishingly small number of consumers with a much larger group of buyers being willing to pay for the neck snapping acceleration off the line even if the power tails off at higher speeds.
Best,
I tend to agree with you but SOOOO many posts keep complaining about the top end acceleration of the Model 3 Performance. They just keep bringing it up over and over again like they do 130 mph down the highway every single day.
Honestly, I think it is just a case of a few people that think they want it keep asking for it. However, it is something Tesla easily can do. They currently do it with the Model S LR and BMW does it with their I4 M50.
If they can add constant HP motors for not much increase in price they might as well do it. It shouldn’t affect normal highway efficiency very much at all.
I don't have many places that I could go 130mph around here. In VA, that's not a ticket....it's a ride to jail and having your car impounded. And then there's the fact that if any of the suspension components go POOF (sure...never happens with the M3...) at that speed and you're lunchmeat along with anyone unfortunate enough to be in your damage path. But I do have frequent opportunities to get from a standstill to 60/70mph lickety split.
Best,
I am in NC and while our speed enforcement isn’t quite as strict as VA they do enforce the speed limits fairly strictly here. 130+ mph has no business being done on the streets of the US. It just isn’t responsible. I too prefer the 0-60 mph metric but I wouldn’t mind the top end pulling power for the track.I don't have many places that I could go 130mph around here. In VA, that's not a ticket....it's a ride to jail and having your car impounded. And then there's the fact that if any of the suspension components go POOF (sure...never happens with the M3...) at that speed and you're lunchmeat along with anyone unfortunate enough to be in your damage path. But I do have frequent opportunities to get from a standstill to 60/70mph lickety split.
Best,
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
You're posting in the "Performance/Plaid" thread. People who are already paying way more than they need to pay for a car have plenty of "weird" desires. It's a small demographic. But in order to actually grab it (otherwise they might lose it entirely), Tesla needs things to be "good enough" to match the market desire.
Exactly. Some of us live 0-60 at a time.
Heat the battery and it does just fine through the 1/8. However, when compared to multi speed transmission cars it does fall off after 100 mph considerably.
Acceleration drops at that point for every car. No street car maintains constant torque above 50-60 mph. Name another sub $40k car that can run 95+ mph in the 1/8.
If you put it in Track Mode it struggles with straight line acceleration. If you heat the battery it doesn’t. It is kind of like when someone forgets to take an ICE car out of ECO mode and then complains that it is slow.
