Sandy Munro talks about the teardown of the Model 3

[SMAlset]

I think I remember at least 3 interviews on Autoline.tv where Sandy Munro talks about his opinions of Elon Musk.
Here is Sandy Munro's latest interview on Autoline - yes you can "speed up the interview playback" try 1.5 times

many interesting perspectives on today's auto industry (and Tesla/Elon) - well worth your time
side note: deming.org

I saw a link to Sandy's latest interview on "Autoline" this afternoon on Teslarati and just finished watching it on YouTube. Last show he said he was going to China and so came back with his thoughts on that including Tesla's plant there and the timeline for producing cars from there. The whole show was more or less about Tesla in one way or another. I found it worth the hour+ watching it. Interesting perspectives on Tesla in China, Chinese automotive industry, the deep interest in everything Tesla is doing, Sandy's outlook on Tesla now and even long term. Little antennas everywhere on lots of boards, even interest in Tesla's charging system. Mentioned Nio's comments about China's support for Tesla and Elon personally (with citizenship--I wonder if it was given so China could bring Tesla there the way Elon wanted and bring some prestige to China's manufacturing capabilities since he was a "citizen" now). Sandy also said Nio and 3 other Chinese auto mfgrs bought Munroe's full teardown and analysis packages on the Model 3. Undoubtedly Munroe and Associates' teardown work on Tesla's Model 3 over this past year and Sandy's actually driving the car in the real world has made a believer in Sandy for sure. His outlook on other companies and the American automotive industry interesting as well. Oh and he pretty much calls out these "analysts" and short-sellers/bloggers for not knowing what they are talking about.

Having watched the Tesla Model 3 "Autoline" segments from the first segment, has me thinking back to the dismissive attitude displayed towards Tesla back then. With Sandy becoming more impressed with what Tesla has done as his company delved further into the design/production of the car, the yuck-yucks from the panel and some of their guests has mellowed out quite a bit and things are taken much more seriously now. Just an observation. Think I've seen the MotorTrend guy on twice now and have my doubts about how much he really knows about the car, other than what he hears or reads. Never been impressed with his questions or answers.

 

[Garlan Garner]

It takes a special someone to resurrect a 90 day stale thread and try to turn it into a vindicating "told you so".

Munro is still critical of the assembly used in the Model 3 and has sent Tesla a list of over 200 changes he recommends they make in order to reduce their car.

He must be a pretty big fan though since AFAIK Tesla haven't paid him anything for his work.

Oh no....I'm not resurrecting anything.

Morono just made NEW comments yesterday where I said 3 months ago that he would have to come around and see the error of his ways. Why it took 3 months.....for an "expert" to learn what a novice saw....

AND TODAY IS THE DAY.

I have been extremely patient after the flogging I took.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Looks like we got a 2 for 1 today.

Top Gear has also come around to the error of their ways......

Top Gear finally has a good video and review of Tesla

What a glorious day.

 

[TT97]

I think I remember at least 3 interviews on Autoline.tv where Sandy Munro talks about his opinions of Elon Musk.
Here is Sandy Munro's latest interview on Autoline - yes you can "speed up the interview playback" try 1.5 times

many interesting perspectives on today's auto industry (and Tesla/Elon) - well worth your time
side note: deming.org

Great episode, liked how Munro was mocking the analyst. Loved the small tribute to Dr. Deming.

From a different thread:

Sandy Munro is a very accomplished engineer with decades of experience in automotive manufacturing. Sandy worked very closely and was mentored by an old professor of mine at NYU, Dr. Edward Deming. Although he was 90 when I took his class, Dr. Deming was an absolutely brilliant person and by far the most impressive professor I ever had.

 

[Brando]

@TT97
Deming Prize - Wikipedia
From Japan where the annual awards are decided (TQM = Total Quality Management):
Deming Prize
Interesting to go read those companies that have won the Demings Prize

Sandy Munro mentioned an approximate quote from Edward Deming: (see above Autoline show)
"I thought 75% of company mistakes came from Management. I was wrong. More like 90%."

Toyota paid attention to Deming - and now the world knows about "the Toyota Method".

Remember "At Ford, Quality Job One." How ever, after UAW workers got $5,000 bonuses one year. Henry III ended the program as he thought the "management" and not the workers deserved these bonuses. Sad.

 

[moridin2002]

Oh no....I'm not resurrecting anything.

Morono just made NEW comments yesterday where I said 3 months ago that he would have to come around and see the error of his ways. Why it took 3 months.....for an "expert" to learn what a novice saw....

AND TODAY IS THE DAY.

I have been extremely patient after the flogging I took.

His comments about the build quality of the vehicles he purchased still stand as they're extremely well documented (My personal Model 3 has/had some of the very same issues). The same holds true for his comments about the body design and unnecessary complexity which is exemplified by Munro's comment: "I can't cost for stupid." Elon Musk even admitted as much by stating Tesla fired the guy responsible. So, no, not vindicated. And, yes, Munro, who you so childishly continue to name call, still knows a lot more than you about vehicle design and its design for manufacturability.

 

[StealthP3D]

And, yes, Munro, who you so childishly continue to name call, still knows a lot more than you about vehicle design and its design for manufacturability.

Munro raves about the quality of the Model 3. He has something like 40 employees in his business and a bunch of them have already bought their own Model 3. His only remaining beef is that Tesla spent too much money on structural reinforcements of the chassis, the only downside being less profit and a few extra lbs. The upside is the Model 3 has the lowest probability of injury of any car ever crash tested by the government and really good driving dynamics due to the fact that it's not a typical "flexi-flyer" built to a low price point.

I don't know about you but I care more about the safety and driving dynamics than how much profit Tesla makes. And it appears to handle the extra weight just fine in terms of performance and economy. So to me, Munro's complaint is a net positive for the buyer even if Tesla could have made more money by building a cheaper chassis.

Munro might know a lot about hitting the sweet spot of driveability, performance, safety and affordability/profitability but I've never liked bean counters very much. You can take it too far and it has ruined many good products. I like the fact that Tesla errs on the side of building it like the mythical brick shithouse. And yet the EV detractors still try to pigeon hole the Model 3 as a cheap flimsy car that is unsafe at any speed.

 

[ninpb]

The luddites and analysts where who knows where they get their info from, are sitting in front of Sandy in that video.

Sandy: they got rid of a lot of wires by using a lot of wireless transmission of data.

Host: sounds hackable

Sandy: no

 

[voip-ninja]

Listened to the whole thing, always fascinating listening to Sandy Munroe, an engineer that knows his shite.

The hardest part honestly is listening not only to the dinosaur outmoded geezers sitting in front of him but the ancient lizards that call in with their questions that sound 10 years too late.

 

[moridin2002]

Munro raves about the quality of the Model 3. He has something like 40 employees in his business and a bunch of them have already bought their own Model 3. His only remaining beef is that Tesla spent too much money on structural reinforcements of the chassis, the only downside being less profit and a few extra lbs. The upside is the Model 3 has the lowest probability of injury of any car ever crash tested by the government and really good driving dynamics due to the fact that it's not a typical "flexi-flyer" built to a low price point.

I don't know about you but I care more about the safety and driving dynamics than how much profit Tesla makes. And it appears to handle the extra weight just fine in terms of performance and economy. So to me, Munro's complaint is a net positive for the buyer even if Tesla could have made more money by building a cheaper chassis.

Munro might know a lot about hitting the sweet spot of driveability, performance, safety and affordability/profitability but I've never liked bean counters very much. You can take it too far and it has ruined many good products. I like the fact that Tesla errs on the side of building it like the mythical brick shithouse. And yet the EV detractors still try to pigeon hole the Model 3 as a cheap flimsy car that is unsafe at any speed.

Look, I'm not on here to bash the Model 3 (I own one) or Tesla in particular, but constructive, well documented criticism from someone (Munro) that has literally torn apart hundreds, if not thousands of cars, should not be automatically dismissed. And, he's willing to come talk about a lot of those findings (good and bad) in a public setting where we can all be the beneficiary of that knowledge.

Munro's comments about body build quality and overly complicated body-in-white still stand for the vehicles they tore down... they are documented in their reports. Munro compared it to other vehicles. The two Model 3s they had were not nearly as good as the i3 on fit and finish, nor when compared to other vehicles in the luxury segment. Munro actually measured things... extensively. If you pay attention to what Munro was saying, they mentioned they've thought about getting a newer vehicle to tear apart. If quality has improved, it will be captured in the objective measurements.

Additionally, his comments about unnecessary complexity and overly built chassis are important criticisms and cannot be dismissed on their face. What he's said in prior interviews is that the body-in-white was not only overly complex to build, but overbuilt to the point that it doesn't take advantage of the battery pack as a structural entity, despite the battery pack being designed as such. Its likely that if two parts (body-in-white and battery pack case) were redesigned and optimized, there would be a significant reduction in costs due to more efficient material usage without any loss of safety (possibly even better safety due to reduced mass through better braking) or effective chassis stiffness for the loads it would see. Rather than '"good 'nough", the question should be how much better would margins be on the car, how much quicker could they have ramped up production, and how much faster/better handling/more range would a Model 3 get without the extra chassis weight and complexity - maybe 100 - 200lbs? Take a look in your rear fender well area and look at all the seam sealer on the panels for the trunk area. So many overlapping panels in such a small space.

I'm also not sure if you didn't hear Munro's comments about bean counters and management issues in the latest video. Have you even watched it? He's an engineer by training and trade. Costing is a byproduct of his business. See his comments around 54:00 about "cheapening the product" and again at 1:03:00.

Munro has a lot of really good things to say about the Model 3, and he has some things he doesn't like. Its one thing to have an opinion, its another to formulate an opinion based on data and experience, and be willing to change it as you learn more.

 

[SMAlset]

If you guys haven't seen the Jalopnik produced video of their visit to Munroe & Associates from 4/3/19 where they meet with a few of the Munroe employees and go over a comparison of parts between the Bolt, i3 and Model 3 (battery, motor, electronics, frame and body parts), here it is:

 

[mongo]

Additionally, his comments about unnecessary complexity and overly built chassis are important criticisms and cannot be dismissed on their face. What he's said in prior interviews is that the body-in-white was not only overly complex to build, but overbuilt to the point that it doesn't take advantage of the battery pack as a structural entity, despite the battery pack being designed as such. Its likely that if two parts (body-in-white and battery pack case) were redesigned and optimized, there would be a significant reduction in costs due to more efficient material usage without any loss of safety (possibly even better safety due to reduced mass through better braking) or effective chassis stiffness for the loads it would see.

The S/X pack is structural to the car, it is barely movable without it. The 3 is self supporting which allows a lighter, less structural pack (lower cost SR version).
Compare the internal rib structure of the two, S/X has 14 module pockets (plus 1 double in the front), 3 has 4 full length channels with not cross bracing. The 3 pack is not made to be structural, note the number of bolt holes to support the 3 pack from the car's structure.

S/X pack photo form @wk057 (on TMC somewhere), 3 pick from Jack Rickard

 

[Probllama]

If you guys haven't seen the Jalopnik produced video of their visit to Munroe & Associates from 4/3/19 where they meet with a few of the Munroe employees and go over a comparison of parts between the Bolt, i3 and Model 3 (battery, motor, electronics, frame and body parts), here it is:

Real-life Leonard and Sheldon's field trip to Munro's shop

 

[SammichLover]

His comments about the build quality of the vehicles he purchased still stand as they're extremely well documented...

For the 2017 builds. Things have changed. Things had already changed to an extent when he was making those comments, it was just that he hadn't adjusted because he was operating on n=1 (well probably n=2) with an inherent bias of having a very early build.

 

[Brando]

note: over sixty employees at Munro and Associates:
People at Munro | Munro & Associates, Inc.

Many reports, talks, videos to browse.

example: common sense about costs/labor/materials
Design, change, disruption
A Peek Into The Future - Sandy Munro
Edward Deming would be proud of Sandy.

GM crushed the EV1 and BMW dropped (sold 2 carbon fiber manufacturing in Washington State) the i3 program rather than continuous improvement.

 

[Brando]

70% of our ability to make money was in design

MANUFACTURABILITY = Build For Manufacturing
- Design For Assembly = Design For Automation
- snap fit vs nuts & bolts or welding or gluing
- Design for NOT Assembly - such as 3D printed part - no assembly required

warning sound is poor - perhaps some smart reader could "clear up the audio and re-post?"
or maybe some reader will find this same topic covered by Sandy with much better sound track.

 

[Brando]

SGL and BMW jointly own the Carbon Fiber Factory in Moses Lake, Wa.
So I was wrong, I think BMW may still own and maybe shipping carbon fiber back to Germany.
BUT we shall see IF BMW management allows this i-Vehicle (i3/i8) project lessons into BMW i5.

Sandy Munro analysis Prius, Volt, Bolt, then was Model 3
BEFORE Model 3

 

[TT97]

If you guys haven't seen the Jalopnik produced video of their visit to Munroe & Associates from 4/3/19 where they meet with a few of the Munroe employees and go over a comparison of parts between the Bolt, i3 and Model 3 (battery, motor, electronics, frame and body parts), here it is:

I loved their final line, pointing to the 3, "I think that is going to be the future now, we're going to have to listen to Elon Musk for decades now, (oomps) oh well."

 

[Garlan Garner]

His comments about the build quality of the vehicles he purchased still stand as they're extremely well documented (My personal Model 3 has/had some of the very same issues). The same holds true for his comments about the body design and unnecessary complexity which is exemplified by Munro's comment: "I can't cost for stupid." Elon Musk even admitted as much by stating Tesla fired the guy responsible. So, no, not vindicated. And, yes, Munro, who you so childishly continue to name call, still knows a lot more than you about vehicle design and its design for manufacturability.

Murono is changing his own mind.

That has nothing to do with me.

Every review and comment he has given subsequent to his first one has been a total about face......and it will continue because HE ( not me ) was totally wrong.

I give him credit for not sticking with that "professional" ( sarcastic ) moronic mess of a first review.

Again...he's correcting himself....not correcting me.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Look, I'm not on here to bash the Model 3 (I own one) or Tesla in particular, but constructive, well documented criticism from someone (Munro) that has literally torn apart hundreds, if not thousands of cars, should not be automatically dismissed. And, he's willing to come talk about a lot of those findings (good and bad) in a public setting where we can all be the beneficiary of that knowledge.

Munro's comments about body build quality and overly complicated body-in-white still stand for the vehicles they tore down... they are documented in their reports. Munro compared it to other vehicles. The two Model 3s they had were not nearly as good as the i3 on fit and finish, nor when compared to other vehicles in the luxury segment. Munro actually measured things... extensively. If you pay attention to what Munro was saying, they mentioned they've thought about getting a newer vehicle to tear apart. If quality has improved, it will be captured in the objective measurements.

Additionally, his comments about unnecessary complexity and overly built chassis are important criticisms and cannot be dismissed on their face. What he's said in prior interviews is that the body-in-white was not only overly complex to build, but overbuilt to the point that it doesn't take advantage of the battery pack as a structural entity, despite the battery pack being designed as such. Its likely that if two parts (body-in-white and battery pack case) were redesigned and optimized, there would be a significant reduction in costs due to more efficient material usage without any loss of safety (possibly even better safety due to reduced mass through better braking) or effective chassis stiffness for the loads it would see. Rather than '"good 'nough", the question should be how much better would margins be on the car, how much quicker could they have ramped up production, and how much faster/better handling/more range would a Model 3 get without the extra chassis weight and complexity - maybe 100 - 200lbs? Take a look in your rear fender well area and look at all the seam sealer on the panels for the trunk area. So many overlapping panels in such a small space.

I'm also not sure if you didn't hear Munro's comments about bean counters and management issues in the latest video. Have you even watched it? He's an engineer by training and trade. Costing is a byproduct of his business. See his comments around 54:00 about "cheapening the product" and again at 1:03:00.

Munro has a lot of really good things to say about the Model 3, and he has some things he doesn't like. Its one thing to have an opinion, its another to formulate an opinion based on data and experience, and be willing to change it as you learn more.

I really believe that a deemed professional of his caliber should not have to "walk back" so many of is own comments on the Model 3.

All of that experience that people are stating....and all of that professionalism and he errored on many preliminary issues such as " Tesla's profit margin on the model 3" and "useless parts".

Indeed there are a lot of people who anchor down on everything that he says concerning cars....which makes me wonder.....how many people he has turned off from buying a Model 3.

How many people "ESPECIALLY INVESTORS" do you think were turned off due to that 1st catastrophic review? How much money did that initial review cost Tesla in investors ( not owners ) ?

Hundreds? Thousands? Millions?