Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2016

[Yggdrasill]

I've actually concluded that the inverters are pretty much identical, component wise. Software limits the current allowed by the various models. There might be some binning happening with the performance vs non-performance versions, but physically they're the same. One day I may fully test this by forcing an S85 to accept P85 firmware, but that's a tale for another day.

It doesn't surprise me that they are very similar, if not identical, but the S85 will pull less amps than the P85D. As you were eager to point out, the waste heat is based on the square of the current, so you won't need to back off the amps very much to make a big difference. Maybe a possible bad connection or FOD would be detected in a P85D, but the S85 simply doesn't stress the HVJB as much as a supercharger, and not in the same way, so there's definitely a potential for there to have been a fault there.

We'll have to just agree to disagree on the significance of heat build up in various components I guess, which is unfortunate since my data is based on the actual components and real data, and your assertions are based on.......... trying to pin this fire on Tesla.

I couldn't "pin this fire on Tesla" even if I wanted to. But as a TSLA investor I am interested to find out the cause of the fire and the potential impact to TSLA.

My current assessment is this: Very possibly the cause of the fire is not a fault of Tesla hardware, but in the event that it is fault in the HVJB or something similar, the impact will be minimal. If so, we're likely talking about a production or servicing fault, not a design fault, and we could possibly be talking about a $1000 inspection on maybe as many as 50k cars, but most likely the impact will be less than that. The superchargers are unlikely to be to be at fault.

I certainly respect you and the data you have collected, but you've supplied no data that contradicts anything I've said.

 

[30seconds]

I don't have the capital to do it (yet), but I think a strategy of RE investing where you follow weed legalization is a really good one. Denver prices and rents have shot up since legalization took place. Lot's of tourism, lots o fpeople moving in to be new renters etc. I am thinking it would be good to buy up multi units in the areas where legalization is taking place right after the vote is in, but before the law is "on" so to speak. Doing a historical analysis on Denver makes me see how much of an opportunity I missed.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh, I'm definitely looking at Sparks, Reno, and Fernley. I think you are dead on here.

Be careful with Nevada real estate. You wouldn't believe the amount of empty land available to keep building. Plus Northern Nevada is beautiful, but pretty much in the middle of nowhere. It is a long empty drive to the east before you get to Salt Lake City. Really unbelievably long, flat and empty.

 

[tom66]

I've actually concluded that the inverters are pretty much identical, component wise. Software limits the current allowed by the various models. There might be some binning happening with the performance vs non-performance versions, but physically they're the same. One day I may fully test this by forcing an S85 to accept P85 firmware, but that's a tale for another day.

I believe the sport (P85) and non-sport (S60/S85) powertrains are different, at least for earlier models. Primarily the inverter output current is higher on the sport version and there are different part numbers for sport and non-sport p/trains. But it wouldn't surprise me now if Tesla has just three drive units (high power rear, low power rear, and low power front) to simplify manufacturing logistics and servicing.

 

[wk057]

I believe the sport (P85) and non-sport (S60/S85) powertrains are different, at least for earlier models. Primarily the inverter output current is higher on the sport version and there are different part numbers for sport and non-sport p/trains. But it wouldn't surprise me now if Tesla has just three drive units (high power rear, low power rear, and low power front) to simplify manufacturing logistics and servicing.

I believe the different part numbers stem from binning. Pretty sure the physical components are the same. I could be wrong, but I've seen the insides of both and couldn't find any differences.

...the S85 simply doesn't stress the HVJB as much as a supercharger...

Well, I'll just leave this thread by pointing out that this is demonstrably false.

First, the S85 is advertised as 373 HP, which is ~280 kW. Superchargers peak out at ~120kW, or about 2.3x less power than full acceleration in an S85.

Next, try driving an S85 in the mountains for a bit and getting Wh/mi averages well into the quadruple digits. You can easily put continuous stress on the components in excess of what a supercharge would for extended periods. The same goes for high speed driving/racing/whatever. Take an S85 on the Autobahn maybe?

Anyway, I've said what needed to be said on the matter and I've once again reminded myself why I stay out of the investor section of the forum.

On that topic, for what it's worth, I lost faith in Tesla as a company in general last year and sold 100% of my TSLA, around 2000 shares worth. The company overall has just been making far too many stupid decisions for my liking, mostly from a customer relations and retention standpoint, that I couldn't justify keeping a large long term investment in the company. Love my cars, but I'm done as an investor (and as a customer) until things get better.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Well, I'll just leave this thread by pointing out that this is demonstrably false.

First, the S85 is advertised as 373 HP, which is ~280 kW. Superchargers peak out at ~120kW, or about 2.3x less power than full acceleration in an S85.

Next, try driving an S85 in the mountains for a bit and getting Wh/mi averages well into the quadruple digits. You can easily put continuous stress on the components in excess of what a supercharge would for extended periods. The same goes for high speed driving/racing/whatever. Take an S85 on the Autobahn maybe?

Maybe I should have specified Norwegian roads. The highest average power over a meaningful amount of time I believe anyone will be able to accomplish on public roads without dying or becoming headline news is in the area of 50 kW. And then you'd very much be pushing it.

On that topic, for what it's worth, I lost faith in Tesla as a company in general last year and sold 100% of my TSLA, around 2000 shares worth. The company overall has just been making far too many stupid decisions for my liking, mostly from a customer relations and retention standpoint, that I couldn't justify keeping a large long term investment in the company. Love my cars, but I'm done as an investor (and as a customer) until things get better.

I agree communication and quality control are two of Teslas biggest challenges. But I think they will get better and better. These are growing pains. And by the time these issues are sorted out, TSLA will be 500+ USD.

 

[jesselivenomore]

Love my cars, but I'm done as an investor (and as a customer) until things get better.

I appreciate your technical posts in this thread. Sorry to hear about your experience with Tesla. Do you mind elaborating about the general issues you have with them? I'd like to determine for myself how adverse they are to share price. Thanks.

Although in general, if one is investing based on how they feel about a product/company, exiting your investment when your feelings change is a good reason. (Regardless of whether share price eventually goes up or down)

 

[Ingineer]

Oh come on. I've personally dropped a rear drive unit from a Model S. I assure you the HV connection is not a bolted junction.

The drive units on every car I've worked on use bolted connections. The only quick connect in the motor power path are the rapid-mate blades at the pack interface. I'll dig up some pix when I get home.

 

[AlMc]

I believe the different part numbers stem from binning. Pretty sure the physical components are the same. I could be wrong, but I've seen the insides of both and couldn't find any differences.



Well, I'll just leave this thread by pointing out that this is demonstrably false.

First, the S85 is advertised as 373 HP, which is ~280 kW. Superchargers peak out at ~120kW, or about 2.3x less power than full acceleration in an S85.

Next, try driving an S85 in the mountains for a bit and getting Wh/mi averages well into the quadruple digits. You can easily put continuous stress on the components in excess of what a supercharge would for extended periods. The same goes for high speed driving/racing/whatever. Take an S85 on the Autobahn maybe?

Anyway, I've said what needed to be said on the matter and I've once again reminded myself why I stay out of the investor section of the forum.

On that topic, for what it's worth, I lost faith in Tesla as a company in general last year and sold 100% of my TSLA, around 2000 shares worth. The company overall has just been making far too many stupid decisions for my liking, mostly from a customer relations and retention standpoint, that I couldn't justify keeping a large long term investment in the company. Love my cars, but I'm done as an investor (and as a customer) until things get better.

Thanks for getting invloved in the discussion. (Sorry I dragged you in)

I appreciate your technical posts in this thread. Sorry to hear about your experience with Tesla. Do you mind elaborating about the general issues you have with them? I'd like to determine for myself how adverse they are to share price. Thanks.

Although in general, if one is investing based on how they feel about a product/company, exiting your investment when your feelings change is a good reason. (Regardless of whether share price eventually goes up or down)

You might want to PM him on his other TM opinions.

 

[mmccord]

The only quick connect in the motor power path are the rapid-mate blades at the pack interface. I'll dig up some pix when I get home.

This?

 

[ggr]

The 130 kW is only the extra heat generated in the battery and cabling. The energy that went into the inverter was 1300A x ~290V = 377 kW. The waste heat is (390V - 290V) x 1300A = 130 kW.

I hear your logic, but 130/400 is pretty close to one third; we keep hearing that the drivetrain is much more than 66% efficient. In particular, the number I remember is that regeneration is about 80% efficient. The numbers still don't work for me, although I'm quite prepared to admit that it's probably still my misunderstanding.

 

[JRP3]

I can't seem to find any of my personal photos from back then, but here is a crappy quality one I found elsewhere:

View attachment 106309

Aren't those flanges on the connectors for bolts?

- - - Updated - - -

It's hitting the news http://news.yahoo.com/tesla-model-bursts-flames-while-183006213.html

Happily, no one was injured in the blast

Blast, really?

 

[wk057]

Aren't those flanges on the connectors for bolts?

The drive units on every car I've worked on use bolted connections. The only quick connect in the motor power path are the rapid-mate blades at the pack interface. I'll dig up some pix when I get home.

The connection to the motor is with those plug in connectors. The connector housings mount to the motor casing with screws to hold them in place, but there is no bolt that makes an electrical connection here. No bolted lugs needed to replace the drive unit. That's what I meant.

This? View attachment 106335

This isn't the "inverter to battery" cable. It's the battery "rapid mate" connector (the blades) to the HVJB cable (the end with lugs). Then the HVJB has another cable that goes to the inverter with connectors in the pic I posted.

 

[mmccord]

This isn't the "inverter to battery" cable. It's the battery "rapid mate" connector (the blades) to the HVJB cable (the end with lugs). Then the HVJB has another cable that goes to the inverter with connectors in the pic I posted.

Thanks for the clarification. For the record, i didn't make the sign. I just took the picture.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

Love my cars, but I'm done as an investor (and as a customer) until things get better.

I appreciate your technical posts in this thread. Sorry to hear about your experience with Tesla. Do you mind elaborating about the general issues you have with them? I'd like to determine for myself how adverse they are to share price. Thanks.

I don't know if wk057 shares the same misgivings that I feel about Tesla, but product issues in 2015 gave me some cause for concern.

Specifically:

(1) the Dual Motor torque sleep software was late, resulting in unexpectedly high power consumption from pre-patched P85Ds. This said to me 2 things: the company oversold the D efficiency before they were ready, and they failed to communicate this to customers. People shouldn't have had to find out on these forums before taking delivery of their car

(2) Autopilot. Again, a case of massive over-promising on the timetable.

(3) Model X. I could not figure out why a vehicle built on the proven Model S platform was subject to an absurd number of delays. The "launch" event on Sept. 29 told me pretty much why: Elon told the press that the car was insanely complicated to build ("maybe no one should build this car" was about what Elon said). This had me :cursing: at my computer. A BEV is supposed to be easier to build than an ICE. Instead of leveraging advantages to the max, Tesla shocked itself in the foot. The huge windshield, the stupid second row seats (which can't fold down), and who knows what else messed up things massively. The 48 vs 72 amp charger comes to mind. From an engineering perspective, this is just :cursing: stupid. Not only that, I felt that this put Tesla's 2015 production guidance unnecessarily at risk.

Given how pist I was, you may wonder why I held on to my shares while wk057 sold.

I believe that the Tesla team learned from the Model X experience and will not repeat it with Model 3. Elon's statements that Model X was too complicated and that Model 3 would be simpler are evidence of this.

Model X production finally did get rolling, and if Tesla finally gets production up to the "hundreds per week" level, they will have "pulled the rabbit out of the hat". While there are design choices with Model X I find questionable, the vehicle is getting very favorable reviews from the early adopters.

It comes down to a single fundamental question: do any of these short term mishaps put the Model 3 and goal of 500k/year at substantial risk? In each case I had to honestly, even reluctantly answer no, even if I was upset at design choices or the way customers were being treated. If R&D driven by Model X had spun out of control, or Model S sales tanked, or big investors were no longer willing to keep investing cash in the company, I would have sold. However, none of this happened. I read the 10-Qs every quarter and Tesla's financial situation was satisfactory. Steady production and sales of Model S seem to have given many parties faith that the company was worth the continual investment.

It's game on with Model 3 now. This is what I've been waiting for: to see if Tesla can make the transition from boutique to big mass manufacturing.

The wild card is Tesla Energy -- a related but not quite the same business.

 

[Causalien]

I don't know if wk057 shares the same misgivings that I feel about Tesla, but product issues in 2015 gave me some cause for concern.

Specifically:

(1) the Dual Motor torque sleep software was late, resulting in unexpectedly high power consumption from pre-patched P85Ds. This said to me 2 things: the company oversold the D efficiency before they were ready, and they failed to communicate this to customers. People shouldn't have had to find out on these forums before taking delivery of their car

(2) Autopilot. Again, a case of massive over-promising on the timetable.

(3) Model X. I could not figure out why a vehicle built on the proven Model S platform was subject to an absurd number of delays. The "launch" event on Sept. 29 told me pretty much why: Elon told the press that the car was insanely complicated to build ("maybe no one should build this car" was about what Elon said). This had me :cursing: at my computer. A BEV is supposed to be easier to build than an ICE. Instead of leveraging advantages to the max, Tesla shocked itself in the foot. The huge windshield, the stupid second row seats (which can't fold down), and who knows what else messed up things massively. The 48 vs 72 amp charger comes to mind. From an engineering perspective, this is just :cursing: stupid. Not only that, I felt that this put Tesla's 2015 production guidance unnecessarily at risk.

Given how pist I was, you may wonder why I held on to my shares while wk057 sold.

I believe that the Tesla team learned from the Model X experience and will not repeat it with Model 3. Elon's statements that Model X was too complicated and that Model 3 would be simpler are evidence of this.

Model X production finally did get rolling, and if Tesla finally gets production up to the "hundreds per week" level, they will have "pulled the rabbit out of the hat". While there are design choices with Model X I find questionable, the vehicle is getting very favorable reviews from the early adopters.

It comes down to a single fundamental question: do any of these short term mishaps put the Model 3 and goal of 500k/year at substantial risk? In each case I had to honestly, even reluctantly answer no, even if I was upset at design choices or the way customers were being treated. If R&D driven by Model X had spun out of control, or Model S sales tanked, or big investors were no longer willing to keep investing cash in the company, I would have sold. However, none of this happened. I read the 10-Qs every quarter and Tesla's financial situation was satisfactory. Steady production and sales of Model S seem to have given many parties faith that the company was worth the continual investment.

It's game on with Model 3 now. This is what I've been waiting for: to see if Tesla can make the transition from boutique to big mass manufacturing.

The wild card is Tesla Energy -- a related but not quite the same business.

It's a problem with startups. At low volume, it is very easy to meet the promised expectations. Since the R&D vs the rest of the company's headcount ratio is high. At high volumes, it gets really really hard since now you introduce a bigger problem that is personnel. R&D is inherently inversely scalable with the # of people. So you cannot hire more people and speed up the timeline. This means that every iteration of new technology needs to go through at least 3 years. It means that Model 3 is about 1 year behind IF there's new technolgy involved.

The better step should've been a Model X with standard folding seats and normal windshields. Then a Model X+++ with the extra features and extra towing capabilities. I really hope that feature creep does not happen with Model 3. All that Model 3 needs to do is be electric and look cool. It does not need autopilot. The target age group that will be buying the Model 3 are the young single professionals that lives in the city. Young single professionals care about looks. So the only thing I will be looking at is whether or not the shell can land me dates and whether or not it can do 0~3 in 4 seconds so I can impress girls.

 

[jesselivenomore]

I don't know if wk057 shares the same misgivings that I feel about Tesla, but product issues in 2015 gave me some cause for concern.

Specifically:

Thanks. I asked in case there were issues I was not aware of that might change my investment thesis. At least the ones you've listed I have heard of or thought about before, and came to the conclusion that TSLA is worth investing in.

The multiple delays can be grating on customers, but don't pose existential risk as long as they end up delivering IMO.

The Model X design I actually take the other side and think it will end up being a good decision in the long run. I watched the interview where Elon hesitated and pondered whether he would do it all again re: the complexity of Model X. The downside of the overdesign you've mentioned and I agree with, particularly the drain on cash flow that increased risk in the company even though risk should've been decreasing while Model S expanded.

However the upside is not talked about enough. It seems people think the overdesign is just a result of Elon's fascination with gadgetry and being cool. Maybe that is a part of it, but there is the bigger picture.

The fact is, EVs are not widely, or even mildly accepted yet. At less than 1% of total market share, there are vast numbers of the populous who are not even considering an EV. Sure, EV enthusiasts would have gladly purchased a Model X even if it was the exact same car as Model S just with 7 adult seats and high seating position. It would have been much easier to build and many more of them would already have been delivered. However, the goal of Elon, and Tesla Motors is not to sell as many cars are they can to EV enthusiasts. Their goal is to transition the entire market to EV, which means converting the disinterested masses to abandon something they have grown accustom to for 100 years to something entirely new.

In the long run, that may happen slowly anyways as the masses learn about the inherent cost and performance advantages of EV. But in the very first innings, to jumpstart that transition, Tesla needs to be those things and more. Tesla needs to be the cutting edge and COOL. Tesla needs to attract the masses even if they never had any interest in EVs. This is why there is the Falcon Wing door, panoramic windshield, Auto pilot, retracting door handles etc. Yes some of these things cause delays and even some reliability issues, but it also establishes the brand image as the bleeding edge and an aspirational product.

In the end, you have to balance the positives with the negatives of the overdesign of Model X. And I believe the positives will outweigh the short term negatives that hopefully we have now navigated past. I believe the "cool" features of the Model X will allow Tesla to reach a larger audience. Kids and millenials who have already decided that their next or very first car will be an affordable Tesla Model 3 didn't necessarily feel this way because they were EV enthusiasts. They feel this way because they think Tesla Motors is awesome, and the cool features of the Model S and X are part of the reasons why.

 

[RyanT]

Agreed, love the front window on the X. Falcon wing doors as well. It make me want one even while owning a S. Things like extending door handles and auto pilot are what made me buy a S. Just the other day, after a year of ownership my girlfriend commented about how she loves the car as it seems to greet you (extending the door handles). When I get a rental for work I feel like I'm in a "dumb" car now thanks to all the ap sensors, IPad like screen, and such on the S. I think these things while taking more work are worth it. A longish range EV that's a normal car isn't enough to sell for some people. The day I decided to buy was after the D and autopilot event.

 

[Yggdrasill]

I hear your logic, but 130/400 is pretty close to one third; we keep hearing that the drivetrain is much more than 66% efficient. In particular, the number I remember is that regeneration is about 80% efficient. The numbers still don't work for me, although I'm quite prepared to admit that it's probably still my misunderstanding.

Under normal driving, the drivetrain is closer to 80% efficient. But there's no chance of achieving anything near that at full power. Batteries work in the way that the slower you discharge them, the more energy you get out. So, if you drive a 85 kWh Model S really slowly, you might get 78 kWh out of the battery before it is empty. While if you drive like a maniac on a track, you might only be able to get 65 kWh out of the battery. The internal resistance of the battery will soak up exponentially more power at higher power outputs. The same will happen in the cabling - it can withstand the power for short durations without melting, but it's just not massive enough to transfer 1300-1500A with low losses.

 

[Drax7]

"(3) Model X. I could not figure out why a vehicle built on the proven Model S platform was subject to an absurd number of delays. The "launch" event on Sept. 29 told me pretty much why: Elon told the press that the car was insanely complicated to build ("maybe no one should build this car" was about what Elon said). This had me

at my computer. A BEV is supposed to be easier to build than an ICE. Instead of leveraging advantages to the max, Tesla shocked itself in the foot. The huge windshield, the stupid second row seats (which can't fold down), and who knows what else messed up things massively. The 48 vs 72 amp charger comes to mind. From an engineering perspective, this is just

stupid. Not only that, I felt that this put Tesla's 2015 production guidance unnecessarily at risk."


The only reason this stupidity makes sense, is if it makes the car amazing desirable .
I too have a difficulty understanding from my vantage point why they complicated
their product beyond the necessary , potentially compromising their financial
standing . And Elon had many opportunities to dump this complication but
still went along with it. He lived with it long enough to hate it , but decided
nonetheless to go with it. The only justification is that it makes the suv even more
desirable.

 

[MitchJi]

However the upside is not talked about enough. It seems people think the overdesign is just a result of Elon's fascination with gadgetry and being cool. Maybe that is a part of it, but there is the bigger picture.

I believe that you are over thinking EM's motivation. I believe that EM is simply trying to make the best possible cars, in the case of the MX, the best possible CUV. I also believe that it will ultimately be seen as being a success. One early Sig owner said that the MX is going to win a crazy number of awards.