Model S/X deliveries drop off cliff, down 56%

[sillydriver]

I also agree that if they aren't ready to have it in the configurator right after the meeting and shipping in volume before July 1, then they shouldn't (and won't) announce it at the meeting. But of all the possible dates to introduce a significant and potentially Osborning product change, April 22 is a pretty good one. It's early in the quarter so there's time to get the new version ordered and shipped. Significantly later in the quarter (or later in any quarter) and sales in that quarter would be Osborned. But four or more weeks earlier (that is, late in the prior quarter) and the prior quarter's closing would be affected. So there would always be some disruption, but what better time than the 22nd?

 

[wdolson]

The other obvious question is, why would they bother to heavily redesign the pack around 18650s when 2170s are in the offing? It would seem to be a waste of resources.

Maybe Elon was telling the truth about retaining the 18650s? But why????

Maybe they are switching to 108p 2170s with a fewer number of larger modules than the old pack? But that would make a pack of significantly lower voltage. If they did make a 200V pack, they could cut down the 400V charging voltage by splitting it and one half the pack gets charged off one half and the other half of the pack off the other?

 

[sandpiper]

Maybe they are switching to 108p 2170s with a fewer number of larger modules than the old pack? But that would make a pack of significantly lower voltage. If they did make a 200V pack, they could cut down the 400V charging voltage by splitting it and one half the pack gets charged off one half and the other half of the pack off the other?

I can't see them doing something like that. Reducing pack output voltage means larger conductors and higher motor current. I was actually half expecting them to go to 800V with SC3 to reduce all of the in-car conductor and charger cable sizes.

I think the simplest explanation is that they've come up with a way to geometrically shoehorn the extra cells into the pack. Maybe they found a way to reduce the coolant line size? Although as I say that, I'm looking at an image of the pack interior and I'll be darned if I know how that would happen. Heck, I don't know.

 

[sandpiper]

I also agree that if they aren't ready to have it in the configurator right after the meeting and shipping in volume before July 1, then they shouldn't (and won't) announce it at the meeting. But of all the possible dates to introduce a significant and potentially Osborning product change, April 22 is a pretty good one. It's early in the quarter so there's time to get the new version ordered and shipped. Significantly later in the quarter (or later in any quarter) and sales in that quarter would be Osborned. But four or more weeks earlier (that is, late in the prior quarter) and the prior quarter's closing would be affected. So there would always be some disruption, but what better time than the 22nd?

They best case would be to not announce it until the cars are actually in production. They did that with the last refresh.

 

[sillydriver]

They best case would be to not announce it until the cars are actually in production. They did that with the last refresh.

Sounds reasonable. But do we know that they aren't?

 

[sandpiper]

Sounds reasonable. But do we know that they aren't?

No... I suppose not. But if this was going into production now, I think we'd be seeing some other information leaks by now... option codes, information on a new battery out of the regulatory authorities, screwups on the ordering page, whatnot. This smells more like something that is out there for test vehicles. If they kept this this quiet until it was on the line, I'd be very impressed.

 

[sillydriver]

No... I suppose not. But if this was going into production now, I think we'd be seeing some other information leaks by now... option codes, information on a new battery out of the regulatory authorities, screwups on the ordering page, whatnot. This smells more like something that is out there for test vehicles. If they kept this this quiet until it was on the line, I'd be very impressed.

Now you're making me doubt myself.

 

[Nv628]

The obvious reason behind the drop is the Model 3's value is waaay greater than that of an S/X. Unfortunately Tesla made an amazing car for $40K with the S being fractionally better for twice the cost.

Before the 3, S was worth it's price- Supercar quickness with otherworldly technology. The 3 has both of these things for half the price in an easier to drive package. I'm glad I got my Mid-range 2 weeks ago

REFRESH NEEDED

 

[sandpiper]

The obvious reason behind the drop is the Model 3's value is waaay greater than that of an S/X. Unfortunately Tesla made an amazing car for $40K with the S being fractionally better for twice the cost.

Before the 3, S was worth it's price- Supercar quickness with otherworldly technology. The 3 has both of these things for half the price in an easier to drive package. I'm glad I got my Mid-range 2 weeks ago

REFRESH NEEDED

The 3 is not for everybody. I wouldn't buy one because I find the trunk to be limiting. I certainly would consider a Y, and of course my S suits me fine. I also like the general styling of the S a lot more. That said, I definitely agree that it needs an update. For the price of the car it needs to have interior aesthetics and finish comparable to a high end BMW or Merc. I expect that, after the update, it will.

 

[wdolson]

I can't see them doing something like that. Reducing pack output voltage means larger conductors and higher motor current. I was actually half expecting them to go to 800V with SC3 to reduce all of the in-car conductor and charger cable sizes.

I think the simplest explanation is that they've come up with a way to geometrically shoehorn the extra cells into the pack. Maybe they found a way to reduce the coolant line size? Although as I say that, I'm looking at an image of the pack interior and I'll be darned if I know how that would happen. Heck, I don't know.

The output side of the pack is run through an inverter, so the input DC voltage is not that important. The only place that needs the heavier cabling is from the pack to the inverter.

Reverse engineering is tough enough, but reverse engineering something that may or may not exist from some breadcrumbs in the firmware is even tougher.

 

[sandpiper]

The output side of the pack is run through an inverter, so the input DC voltage is not that important. The only place that needs the heavier cabling is from the pack to the inverter.

Reverse engineering is tough enough, but reverse engineering something that may or may not exist from some breadcrumbs in the firmware is even tougher.

Most industrial use inverters won’t produce AC output voltage exceeding the DC bus voltage. I can’t say for sure that Tesla’s won’t but i would be surprised.

 

[Brave Ulysses]

The obvious reason behind the drop is the Model 3's value is waaay greater than that of an S/X. Unfortunately Tesla made an amazing car for $40K with the S being fractionally better for twice the cost.

Before the 3, S was worth it's price- Supercar quickness with otherworldly technology. The 3 has both of these things for half the price in an easier to drive package. I'm glad I got my Mid-range 2 weeks ago

REFRESH NEEDED

Close. I would never buy a Model 3 over my Model X. But that’s because of the X offering things that the 3 does not. In areas that are shared, which is most areas, the 3 is a significantly better value. So you are right, for most people, Tesla lowered the price of entry..... significantly. For everyone else, they have ****ed around so much with their lineup and pricing that no one knows what is going on. I bought my X in September. If I was looking now I would probably be waiting to see what the hell is going on. The problem is Tesla doesn’t seem to know what is going on.

 

[sillydriver]

So the fun guessing game of the day is what VG could have discovered that's bigger than Raven (improved motors) and is revealed in code. For example, a cosmetic refresh of the exterior probably wouldn't affect the code. A bigger battery could but that wouldn't be enough of a surprise to match VG's enthusiasm. Nor would AP3, which we know is coming. There are so many possibilities that any single guess is likely to be wrong, but for what it's worth my guess is that the code contains parameters relating to the UI that give away a significant interior refresh: for example, a change in the dimensions of the main screen from portrait to landscape, confirming that a redesign of the interior to something like the M3's is imminent. Or possibly parameters for a HUD, which by itself isn't major enough to eclipse Raven, but would be if there was evidence that the rest of the interior was being redesigned too.

It sounds like VG has spilled the beans. For the sake of Tesla's quarter I hope the timing is availability at next Monday's meeting, not June or later as Electrek suggests.



From Electrek today:

Now we’ve learned that the electric motor upgrade might only be the tip of the iceberg that is the Model S and Model X upgrade.

Sources with access to Tesla’s latest software told Electrek that the code shows that the automaker is now working on Model S and Model X vehicles with the same battery architecture based on the 2170 battery cells found in Model 3.

It’s still unclear what kind of battery pack capacity Tesla could deliver in Model S and Model X with the new architecture, but it is expected to be higher than the current 100 kWh top capacity.

On top of the higher energy capacity, the new pack should enable a higher charge rate to help Model S and Model X catch up to Model 3’s new 250 kW top charge rate with the new Supercharger V3.

Furthermore, the new software includes code to handle CCS charging for Model S and Model X like the current Model 3 vehicles in Europe.

... A source indicates that it could be ready in June and Tesla could even time it with the launch of the interior refresh, which we revealed last year. At that time, our sources said that Tesla was planning to release the new interior in early Q3 2019, but the plans could have accelerated slightly.

 

[wdolson]

It's possible the low demand in Q1 pushed up the timeline for the refresh.

 

[sandpiper]

It's possible the low demand in Q1 pushed up the timeline for the refresh.

I wonder how likely it is that Tesla could shut down the line for several weeks to do the upgrades, without anybody knowing it was happening? I think it's not likely. And so that implies that we're not quite there yet. Summer is a common time to do this stuff; employees take and extended holiday and come back to a revised production line. So that points to Aug or Sept for the first of the updated cars to be rolling off.

 

[zambono]

I wonder how likely it is that Tesla could shut down the line for several weeks to do the upgrades, without anybody knowing it was happening? I think it's not likely. And so that implies that we're not quite there yet. Summer is a common time to do this stuff; employees take and extended holiday and come back to a revised production line. So that points to Aug or Sept for the first of the updated cars to be rolling off.

Was the line shut when the 2016 refresh happened. I don't recall the line shutting down. I do remember the rumors, the car carrier with the possible different covered fronts etc. I placed my order with the legacy design and within a couple days the refresh was announced and I was grandfathered in. Timed it perfectly.

 

[sandpiper]

Was the line shut when the 2016 refresh happened. I don't recall the line shutting down. I do remember the rumors, the car carrier with the possible different covered fronts etc. I placed my order with the legacy design and within a couple days the refresh was announced and I was grandfathered in. Timed it perfectly.

Assuming the report to be true, the 2016 refresh was much less than this will be. If it's all done at once, you're looking at the battery, drive train, at least some sheet metal and a full interior. I think that's beyond what can practically be done on-the-fly. But who knows? They've surprised me before.

 

[testarossa]

The obvious reason behind the drop is the Model 3's value is waaay greater than that of an S/X. Unfortunately Tesla made an amazing car for $40K with the S being fractionally better for twice the cost.

Before the 3, S was worth it's price- Supercar quickness with otherworldly technology. The 3 has both of these things for half the price in an easier to drive package. I'm glad I got my Mid-range 2 weeks ago

REFRESH NEEDED

I don't think the 3 competes with the S. They are in a whole different category in terms of their buyers, just as a 7 series BMW buyer doesn't cross shop a 3 series BMW. That said, the Model S is a tired design and in a world where an S Class Mercedes gets a full refresh every 3 years, the finicky buyers at this top layer expect design updates if they're spending $120k or more.

 

[wdolson]

I don't think the 3 competes with the S. They are in a whole different category in terms of their buyers, just as a 7 series BMW buyer doesn't cross shop a 3 series BMW. That said, the Model S is a tired design and in a world where an S Class Mercedes gets a full refresh every 3 years, the finicky buyers at this top layer expect design updates if they're spending $120k or more.

If the Model 3 had been available when I was buying, I would have definitely cross shopped and I probably would have bought a Model 3 even though I like the Model S better.

The Model S is not a typical $100K car. All other cars in that price range compete for the attentions of a certain subset of wealthy people who want over the top luxury or the peak of performance. These cars are to the car market what MacIntosh audio equipment is to audiophiles. It's for those who are willing to pay through the nose for the best.

There have always been quite a few people who could afford $100K cars, but didn't see the point. They don't want a head turner, or the ultimate in luxury, or the ultimate in performance. They want decent transportation that will get them from point A to point B with some creature comforts, but it doesn't have to be over the top, nor do they want attention. These are the people buying Camrys, Outbacks, and RAV4s. They see a $100K car as a waste of money.

Some of these people were upsold into the Model S when it was the only thing available. A study done around 2015 found that a large percentage of Model S owners had never owned a car worth more than $60K. The last car I bought new before my Model S cost $21K.

I don't know the size of the $100K luxury market before the Model S, but I'm sure Tesla grew the segment quite a bit by drawing in buyers who had never given the segment a second thought. The only reason the Model S was in that segment to begin with was because it couldn't be made and sold for $40K-$50K at the time. Now it can.

Now that the Model 3 is available Tesla has needed to rethink the Model S. Is it going to be an exclusive $100K car, or is it going to be a modest step up from the Model 3? It can't continue to be a $90K+ step up from the Model 3 lacking features of the Model 3.

By sharing as much as possible with the Model 3 and making other parts similar, they could make a Model S that would sell for about $10K more than the Model 3 at profit. It would have the advantage of being bigger, better range, with a hatchback, but otherwise very similar. That might keep the Model S production numbers up.

Or they could go the route and compete with the European luxury cars in features. Ultimately I think that would be a mistake. That segment is shrinking back to the size it was before the Model S blew it up and the Europeans are beginning to roll out their own EVs. Tesla will still beat the Europeans on range for several years, but on luxury, the Europeans can just do it better.

Elon is by nature rather spartan. He has a lot of trouble wrapping his head around all the gadgets in European luxury cars. He had trouble embracing the concept of a standard console in the center of the car. The Model S didn't get it until it had been in production almost 4 years.

Tesla's strength is delivering convenience, performance, range, and electronic features, but not all that strong in luxury. They are better suited for aiming at the center of the market instead of the top end. Let BMW and Mercedes concentrate on making massage chairs on wheels and play to Tesla's strengths.

 

[sillydriver]

If the Model 3 had been available when I was buying, I would have definitely cross shopped and I probably would have bought a Model 3 even though I like the Model S better.

The Model S is not a typical $100K car. All other cars in that price range compete for the attentions of a certain subset of wealthy people who want over the top luxury or the peak of performance. These cars are to the car market what MacIntosh audio equipment is to audiophiles. It's for those who are willing to pay through the nose for the best.

There have always been quite a few people who could afford $100K cars, but didn't see the point. They don't want a head turner, or the ultimate in luxury, or the ultimate in performance. They want decent transportation that will get them from point A to point B with some creature comforts, but it doesn't have to be over the top, nor do they want attention. These are the people buying Camrys, Outbacks, and RAV4s. They see a $100K car as a waste of money.

Some of these people were upsold into the Model S when it was the only thing available. A study done around 2015 found that a large percentage of Model S owners had never owned a car worth more than $60K. The last car I bought new before my Model S cost $21K.

I don't know the size of the $100K luxury market before the Model S, but I'm sure Tesla grew the segment quite a bit by drawing in buyers who had never given the segment a second thought. The only reason the Model S was in that segment to begin with was because it couldn't be made and sold for $40K-$50K at the time. Now it can.

Now that the Model 3 is available Tesla has needed to rethink the Model S. Is it going to be an exclusive $100K car, or is it going to be a modest step up from the Model 3? It can't continue to be a $90K+ step up from the Model 3 lacking features of the Model 3.

By sharing as much as possible with the Model 3 and making other parts similar, they could make a Model S that would sell for about $10K more than the Model 3 at profit. It would have the advantage of being bigger, better range, with a hatchback, but otherwise very similar. That might keep the Model S production numbers up.

Or they could go the route and compete with the European luxury cars in features. Ultimately I think that would be a mistake. That segment is shrinking back to the size it was before the Model S blew it up and the Europeans are beginning to roll out their own EVs. Tesla will still beat the Europeans on range for several years, but on luxury, the Europeans can just do it better.

Elon is by nature rather spartan. He has a lot of trouble wrapping his head around all the gadgets in European luxury cars. He had trouble embracing the concept of a standard console in the center of the car. The Model S didn't get it until it had been in production almost 4 years.

Tesla's strength is delivering convenience, performance, range, and electronic features, but not all that strong in luxury. They are better suited for aiming at the center of the market instead of the top end. Let BMW and Mercedes concentrate on making massage chairs on wheels and play to Tesla's strengths.

Speaking selfishly about what I want, I would love it if Tesla took all the cost savings they've uncovered that could be applied to building an S-sized car, kept the high price point the same, and plowed the difference into more features and luxury. But reading your comment dispassionately, I think you're right: building the car that you suggest would be the safer business decision. Yet if they do that it would leave more of an opening for consideration of the Taycan and the like.