Model Y 40% more efficient than Mustang Mach E

[FredMertz]

People might not care, but long term this is a Tesla advantage.

IMHO, the opposite is the actual truth. If this is an advantage, it is a short-term advantage, unless you assume that Tesla will remain well ahead of the curve on a long-term basis, which is something that I don't believe has ever happened in the history of technology.

 

[patmurphey]

IMHO, the opposite is the actual truth. If this is an advantage, it is a short-term advantage, unless you assume that Tesla will remain well ahead of the curve on a long-term basis, which is something that I don't believe has ever happened in the history of technology.

Maybe so, but for the time being, not long after the lagging Mach E is introduced, the next generation of battery and manufacturing efficiency will be introduced by Tesla at Giga Berlin and Giga Texas, further increasing technology lead. They don't rest on their laurels.

 

[FredMertz]

Maybe so, but for the time being, not long after the lagging Mach E is introduced, the next generation of battery and manufacturing efficiency will be introduced by Tesla at Giga Berlin and Giga Texas, further increasing technology lead. They don't rest on their laurels.

"For the time being" makes it sound like you're agreeing with me that it is a short-term advantage.

 

[AllanO]

Oh and FYI, EV's are so overwhelmingly more efficient than ICE that most buyers wont notice this, they will look at range compared to range and never see the MPGe figure.

I assume you are aware that lower efficiency also means longer charging time for the same distance if you charge with the same number of kW. In this case discussed here: 40% longer charging time.

I think people will notice that. At least if they think a little.

 

[patmurphey]

Um, yeah, most EV's have one motor for RWD, an additional one for AWD. As far as power, what's your point? I suspect most mainstream EV owner's won't care about power ratings. That's one thing I pointed out in my preview of the Mach-E - the salesman kept mentioning the zero-60 time and frankly, I don't really care. But the cheapest Mach-E RWD Extended Range (300 miles) starts around $52k, minus $7500 federal rebate, minus $5000 NJ EV Rebate = $39,500. People will care more about that than 0-60 time.

Here is my Mach-E preview, FYI - Ford Mustang Mach-E EV Preview

That may be your view but comparisons should be made between matching configurations. The AWD long range Mach E is only a couple of thousand dollars less, with the Federal Tax Credit (if you can take the full amount), than the comparable Model Y AWD long range - $44900 in NJ. I can understand Tesla holding back on the RWD long range Model Y because they are selling all they can make of the Dual motor AWD version. Lots of new less expensive modest powered less expensive EVs are coming on the market. If that's what you want, go for it. They will be short of a lot that Tesla offers. The Federal Tax Credit will be on its way out at Ford by the end of next year. (If Biden gets his way, the credit will be back for all US EV makers including Tesla.)

BTW, I live in NW NJ and wouldn't be without AWD in the winter, and would pay a bit extra for a car that was truly fun to drive.

 

[patmurphey]

"For the time being" makes it sound like you're agreeing with me that it is a short-term advantage.

You missed "They don't rest on their laurels."

 

[FredMertz]

You missed "They don't rest on their laurels."

But everyone else will?

Can you give me an example, in the history of commerce, of someone maintaining that kind of monopolistic technological lead over the medium or long-term?

What are the barriers preventing others from catching up?

 

[spokey]

But everyone else will?

Can you give me an example, in the history of commerce, of someone maintaining that kind of monopolistic technological lead over the medium or long-term?
I'd count 100 years as long term.

What are the barriers preventing others from catching up?

When AT&T was broken up they were over 100 years old. I don't recall the exact numbers but they controlled somewhere in the 90+% of the US phones. Interesting (at least to me) the US had some 1400 or so telephone companies of which AT&T owned or controlled companies were about 30 (counting for example the C&P companies as 4 not 1).

And then, it wasn't other companies leapfrogging the technology. The government forced the breakup.

 

[patmurphey]

Fred, the lead is substantial. When we see another company taking the steps to combine technical innovation, software and hardware in house development; manufacturing innovation, tool design and toolmaking; and vertical integration; and massive investment in expansion, we'll see a legitimate competitor. My point is that no one is doing it yet. American startups have a long way to go to convert prototypes into scalable production, none seem to have adopted vertical integration. OEMs are woefully behind in converting their ICE culture into mass EV adoption and innovation. So someday someone will at least match them, but that isn't in sight yet. The place to watch is China.

 

[quarmy]

But everyone else will?

Can you give me an example, in the history of commerce, of someone maintaining that kind of monopolistic technological lead over the medium or long-term?

What are the barriers preventing others from catching up?

Apple.

Superior design, integration and vision. They have always had by far the best laptops and phones (and I've had many of many brands) and with the new 5nm M1 chip they are, again, laughably far ahead of the competition (once it becomes fully supported which will come quickly).

Not saying Tesla can replicate that but it is an example that comes immediately to mind. Tesla is currently significantly ahead (maybe 3-5yrs) in the areas of battery tech, automated driving, software integration and support. Eventually they will be 'caught' but they might be the biggest brand in the world by that point.

 

[FredMertz]

Apple.

Superior design, integration and vision. They have always had by far the best laptops and phones (and I've had many of many brands) and with the new 5nm M1 chip they are, again, laughably far ahead of the competition (once it becomes fully supported which will come quickly).

Not saying Tesla can replicate that but it is an example that comes immediately to mind. Tesla is currently significantly ahead (maybe 3-5yrs) in the areas of battery tech, automated driving, software integration and support. Eventually they will be 'caught' but they might be the biggest brand in the world by that point.

These are extremely subjective statements.

In fact, I think many, including myself, believe that Apple's advantage is their design and an ecosystem that has created high switching costs, not technology. You may believe that the iphone is the "best", but it's by no means the most powerful and never has been.

The M1 is being hailed as the first non-x86 to challenge Intel and AMD, so I would hardly say that Apple's technology has been consistently ahead of the pack.

 

[quarmy]

These are extremely subjective statements.

In fact, I think many, including myself, believe that Apple's advantage is their design and an ecosystem that has created high switching costs, not technology. You may believe that the iphone is the "best", but it's by no means the most powerful and never has been.

The M1 is being hailed as the first non-x86 to challenge Intel and AMD, so I would hardly say that Apple's technology has been consistently ahead of the pack.

All good points but "...Apple's advantage is their design and an ecosystem that has created high switching costs..." could be applied to this combination of battery tech, self-driving and a super charger network. Of course, they will be 'caught' in terms of raw tech numbers but if the experience is better and the brand is synonymous with that experience then they could maintain (or even extend) the market lead as Apple has managed to do.

 

[Puma2020]

People might not care, but long term this is a Tesla advantage. If others have to put in larger batteries to get same (or close) range as Tesla, this costs other manufacturers more $$$$ to get there.

Plus the 4680 cells are going to give Tesla a big advantage where you NEED the extra energy, no matter how areo you are: Trucks. When those batteries roll down to S,3,X,and Y, those will get that much better.

Saw this article today
Tesla teardown expert breaks down the new 4680 Battery Pack

If Sandy is correct or even close, instead of 4,400 batteries in the Y, Tesla can provide the same range and energy with 1,000 batteries, they could also easily provide 400 mile range with 1,200 batteries? They could keep setting the bar higher and higher for the other auto makers to try to match. Lower cost, more range, the rest of the public will eventually figure it out. Took a while for the public to want a model T. Why would I want one of those? My horse is fine just the way it is.

 

[FredMertz]

All good points but "...Apple's advantage is their design and an ecosystem that has created high switching costs..." could be applied to this combination of battery tech, self-driving and a super charger network. Of course, they will be 'caught' in terms of raw tech numbers but if the experience is better and the brand is synonymous with that experience then they could maintain (or even extend) the market lead as Apple has managed to do.

100% agreed — but this was not a debate about Tesla’s ability to keep making the best overall EV experience — it was just about their ability to maintain a significant gap in battery efficiency.

 

[brucet999]

Saw this article today
Tesla teardown expert breaks down the new 4680 Battery Pack

If Sandy is correct or even close, instead of 4,400 batteries in the Y, Tesla can provide the same range and energy with 1,000 batteries, they could also easily provide 400 mile range with 1,200 batteries? They could keep setting the bar higher and higher for the other auto makers to try to match. Lower cost, more range, the rest of the public will eventually figure it out. Took a while for the public to want a model T. Why would I want one of those? My horse is fine just the way it is.

I think you may have missed the point of Munro's presentation. Yes, the 4680 form factor may replace 2170 batteries with 1/5th as many 4680s, but they will still occupy about the same space because they are 5 times bigger. There won't be room to keep packing more and more batteries to keep increasing range. They will, however increase range 16% on the same kWh capacity, just due to improved internal efficiency. It remains to be seen how many more battery cells will be able to fit into the proposed integrated structural battery pack.

 

[patmurphey]

I think you may have missed the point of Munro's presentation. Yes, the 4680 form factor may replace 2170 batteries with 1/5th as many 4680s, but they will still occupy about the same space because they are 5 times bigger. There won't be room to keep packing more and more batteries to keep increasing range. They will, however increase range 16% on the same kWh capacity, just due to improved internal efficiency. It remains to be seen how many more battery cells will be able to fit into the proposed integrated structural battery pack.

Actually, if you delve a bit deeper, the bigger 4680 batteries occupy a smaller space than the 2170s in Tesla's implementation. Their design allows them to be packed together with no cooling structure between cells and they occupy a smaller horizontal space as volume includes a taller dimension. Further the structural pack replaces both the previous car structure and battery pack structure. In an earlier Munro video he showed how the batteries would be further inside the horizontal space, improving crash safety. More importantly, fully implemented they will reduce cost by 56%.

 

[brucet999]

Actually, if you delve a bit deeper, the bigger 4680 batteries occupy a smaller space than the 2170s in Tesla's implementation. Their design allows them to be packed together with no cooling structure between cells and they occupy a smaller horizontal space as volume includes a taller dimension. Further the structural pack replaces both the previous car structure and battery pack structure. In an earlier Munro video he showed how the batteries would be further inside the horizontal space, improving crash safety. More importantly, fully implemented they will reduce cost by 56%.

I noted that, but the point was that there is not room for more and more as I inferred from "keep setting the bar higher and higher" in @puma's post.

 

[mark95476]

This is a website for Tesla owners, fans and enthusiasts that happens to attract trolls that spew FUD. Fortunately, these trolls have failed miserably and Tesla is continuing to roll-out new products. Model 3 has decimated higher-end ICE sedans and Model Y is probably doing the same for SUV/CUVs. Two new factories are being built so Tesla is just getting started.

It's laughable how dumb the trolls sound, but they've got nothing and are grasping at straws--

- Tesla has the best efficiency, full stop
- All vehicles (cars, planes, rockets) are affected by wind resistance, which goes up exponentially with speed
- Any vehicle must expend more energy (gas, diesel, electrons, jet fuel) to go faster

Well, this IS a Tesla website.

And anything else is NOT at the same level right now for range, new FSD, tech, charging network, dealing with dealer network and the resistance to EVs they have etc.
Others are ahead for assembly quality most likely (panel gaps) and initial delivery quality. Subjective of course.

 

[Reeler]

Since Tesla 'open sourced' their patents, the competition is free to copy whatever they want. There is a car maker in China that did just that.

A fast follower doesn't need to do all the investment of Tesla, and can just copy whatever they come up with. It is much cheaper to build a product without any research and development costs.

Perhaps this is by design of EM. Once he has moved to Mars, what does he care?

 

[ScoobyDoo82]

HERE is the big advantage Tesla has. Over on Teslaratti they talk of the MachE official EPA range. 270 miles vs 326 on the MY. Ford Mustang Mach-E gets near-Tesla-level EPA-rated range

BUT! The Tesla has a smaller battery(75kw vs 88 kw in MachE) so Tesla battery costs are LESS to go father. THAT is the Tesla first-mover advantage. (lower costs and faster recharging per mile traveled)

Look at the combine MPGe. MY=125, MachE=90. My goes 40% father per kW! Could be aerodynamics, but MachE looks about same size and smoothness as MY. Plus you would think the 'legacy' automaker could nail the aero and had a lower Cd. The legacy makers are just going to KILL Tesla with all this better knowledge they bring, right?

Long term, I became VERY bullish on Tesla after battery day. Alot didn't because no 1million mile battery. Who cares. IF I drive 20,000 miles/year that's 50 years! What, I get 1 car when turn 20 and die with it 50 years later?

IF EVs are going mainstream, the battery supply is paramount. Didn't MachE 'sell-out' already because no more batteries? Heard the Rav 4 PHEV sold out because Toyota didn't contract for more batteries. What, sold like 4,000 units?

IF going to sell 2million cars a year+, need LOTS of battery capacity. Only Tesla seems to be ahead and planning for this with new cell structure and making their own.

If can get costs of battery down (Tesla goal so sell cheaper car or make more profit per car) and have battery supply (Tesla goal) and have leadership in going the farthest per kw (Tesla lead just shown here), the legacy makers have a long road ahead.

Disclaimer, I own Tesla stock and right now am VERY happy! Hope to get enough profit to buy that MX I've wanted for the family.

Ford will sell less than anticipated, for what it’s worth some people will buy it. But not as many as they think. At the end of the day it still has a Ford badge. I personally think it’s way over hyped. I’m super curious to see how the battery pack and motor hold up after 3 years.