-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I liked to thank ZeApelido for passing on the information. I think it is honest and good information. That said, I work for one of the largest companies in the world(nothing to do with Automotive) and we have production problems and issues that are passed on to friends at a bar or barbecue all the time that are taken out of context. Every major companies has problems like this, it's just a matter of how you deal with them. If I had a dime for every time I heard something that was going to "stop production for weeks" that resulted in nothing I would be driving a Model S right now. So while it is an issue, a 10% failure rate that could be reduced before July 1st is doable. Everybody is SOOO hyper sensitive about Tesla because of the stock price being so high right now they have to just take a chill pill. Even if there are some recall/defects or delays to M3, the company is still poised in the long-haul to produce the best cars in the world.
The Eds references are getting really, really, tired to the point of obsession.
It's a fun exercise in confirmation bias spotting, though.
disagree
hos epi to polu
Do you have links or can you point me to this study or studies?
And whoever then brought up "concern trolls" -- I'm pretty sure that there is a reactive meme about people who label other people as concern trolls in order to dismiss views.
It seems you all are loaded up on the fallacies of dismissal. It's fascinating group-think.
That the OP is an unsubstantiated rumor seems to be enough to put it in its proper place? No need for conspiracy theories or panicky dismissals.
Wonderfully put. Thank you.
Much better than my Eds references which @ohmman rightfully "put it in its proper place".
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
disagree
hos epi to polu
Waiting4M3
Active Member
A lot of this thread has been people arguing about their personal belief whether the OP was trust worthy, and speculating on other people's motivation/logic to believe or dismiss the rumor, is there really any point along this line of argument?
Instead, I'd like to hear some discussion towards trying to ballpark the likelihood and the impact. Below are my guesses:
1) what's the chance the rumor is real? 10%? 20%? 50%? There was one case back in MX days that such warning turned out to be real, so I would guess <50%, maybe <<50%?
2) what's the chance that the problem can't be solved in 5 months before mass release happens? If it's in the electrical system and the fault is supposedly caused by simplification of MS/MX so a working baseline exist, and they just need to find what changed. This is much easier to trouble shoot than for example the FWD where they didn't have a working baseline to start with. I think the chance is good that they can find and fix the problem in 5 months, I would put that at >50%, maybe >>50%.
3) what are the alternatives if they can't fix it in 5 months? I can think of a few, they don't so bad, especially if you look ahead into 2018
a) hold off delivering 10% of cars that are faulty until a fix is found, and also set aside some $ to fix cars that passed initially but showed problems later on
b) roll back to MS/MX design and take a hit on manufacturing/tooling cost temporarily, change it back to the simplified version 1-2 quarters later when a fix is found
c) delay mass release until the issue is fixed, lets say another quarter, this gives 8 months to fix a problem
So in summary, I see the rumor as having low likelihood to be real, with a good chance that it will be fixed before mass release, and even in the worst case it impacts mass release, there are contingencies that are not temporary speed bumps, but no more
Instead, I'd like to hear some discussion towards trying to ballpark the likelihood and the impact. Below are my guesses:
1) what's the chance the rumor is real? 10%? 20%? 50%? There was one case back in MX days that such warning turned out to be real, so I would guess <50%, maybe <<50%?
2) what's the chance that the problem can't be solved in 5 months before mass release happens? If it's in the electrical system and the fault is supposedly caused by simplification of MS/MX so a working baseline exist, and they just need to find what changed. This is much easier to trouble shoot than for example the FWD where they didn't have a working baseline to start with. I think the chance is good that they can find and fix the problem in 5 months, I would put that at >50%, maybe >>50%.
3) what are the alternatives if they can't fix it in 5 months? I can think of a few, they don't so bad, especially if you look ahead into 2018
a) hold off delivering 10% of cars that are faulty until a fix is found, and also set aside some $ to fix cars that passed initially but showed problems later on
b) roll back to MS/MX design and take a hit on manufacturing/tooling cost temporarily, change it back to the simplified version 1-2 quarters later when a fix is found
c) delay mass release until the issue is fixed, lets say another quarter, this gives 8 months to fix a problem
So in summary, I see the rumor as having low likelihood to be real, with a good chance that it will be fixed before mass release, and even in the worst case it impacts mass release, there are contingencies that are not temporary speed bumps, but no more
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Oh I'm sure it's true in the more general form of 'there are issues yet to be resolved'. It doesn't take insider info to know that. In fact, I'll go out on a limb here and say their next product will have issues before release.
I'm more in the camp of 'of course there are engineering issues', that's not unusual when launching a complex product. For every ten bug fixes, one new bug is usually introduced - so I'd expect whatever this is to be fixed soon, along with other things not reported here, and few new stray issues showing up. It's an exciting (and exhausting) phase in the product release lifecycle.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
And in that case the information was apparently specific regarding a change from hydraulic to electric. Even amongst rumors, some are more equal than others and this one smells of garbage from its presentation, source, and overall context.
Here is a more believable rumor: OP's rumor was from the contractor that was fired.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
There are some comments that we should be surprised if there are no big issues found at this point. For a traditional OEM - say Toyota - 3 months before production launch I'd say that is not correct. I'd be surprised if any big issue is found at this point. This is because of their long test cycles.
But in the case of Tesla - I've always assumed we won't see big production numbers this year - because they will find numerous issues because of compressed test time.
But in the case of Tesla - I've always assumed we won't see big production numbers this year - because they will find numerous issues because of compressed test time.
I think the riskier aspect is not initial production assembly problems, but rather serious problems found after miles are accumulated. Like the drive units on the early model S.
This is why I think that the first group of employee Model 3s are really test vehicles. Even if they had to crush 3000 vehicles the cost is not extreme compared to waiting until mid 2018 to do the M3 release. Done well it is also a way to get many Fremont employees deeply engaged in the car's release. Gladis in accounts payable gets a hands-on role through her ownership of an early model 3.
If they really did learn from the model X rollout, they will establish an extensive release criteria before they start to build customer cars. If they have to build customer cars on a date pre-selected by Elon the risk is enormous.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
That's an illiterate banana it's "an" apple
Wow, stock has dropped over 4% since I made this post. Damn I'm good.
/sarcasm
/sarcasm
Moving some posts to snippiness - please report any posts I missed that contain personal attacks. And please keep it civil!
