Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Supercharging Nightmare Begins

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Yes, you sound like you are disagreeing with me and then you come to the same conclusion. Tesla has a lock on the market for "the next couple of years". After that big iron will be making their moves.

I'm looking exclusively at the European market, where the big players are still in denial over BEVs taking over any time soon. There's a lot more talk than action going on in the "Tesla killer" market over this side of the pond. Also a lot of confusion over the definition of an EV, with pretty much all manufacturers lumping PHEV in with BEV and simply calling them all "EV". It makes them look a lot more committed to a true EV future than they actually are. For example VW has recently admitted that it's current EV plans are not up to the task of meeting future legislation, so they're now having to have a rethink about accelerating their EV plans. This is following their CEO recently claiming they were planning to produce 50 million electric vehicles, but without any schedule or definition of what they consider to be an "electric" vehicle. Then when many people called BS on that number (which didn't tie in with any of their investment plans), it was suddenly revised down to 15 million vehicles by 2025. Still no idea how many of those would actually be full BEVs and I very much doubt VW know either!

Let's put it this way, I'm fully expecting to be buying several more Teslas before anything else on the market takes my interest. I passed on the iPace, which seems like a reasonable first effort but I'd much rather stay in the X for a whole bunch of good reasons. iPace production capacity is low too, with a forecast volume under 20K cars per year, which they are currently nowhere near.
 
I'm looking exclusively at the European market, where the big players are still in denial over BEVs taking over any time soon. There's a lot more talk than action going on in the "Tesla killer" market over this side of the pond. Also a lot of confusion over the definition of an EV, with pretty much all manufacturers lumping PHEV in with BEV and simply calling them all "EV". It makes them look a lot more committed to a true EV future than they actually are. For example VW has recently admitted that it's current EV plans are not up to the task of meeting future legislation, so they're now having to have a rethink about accelerating their EV plans. This is following their CEO recently claiming they were planning to produce 50 million electric vehicles, but without any schedule or definition of what they consider to be an "electric" vehicle. Then when many people called BS on that number (which didn't tie in with any of their investment plans), it was suddenly revised down to 15 million vehicles by 2025. Still no idea how many of those would actually be full BEVs and I very much doubt VW know either!

Let's put it this way, I'm fully expecting to be buying several more Teslas before anything else on the market takes my interest. I passed on the iPace, which seems like a reasonable first effort but I'd much rather stay in the X for a whole bunch of good reasons. iPace production capacity is low too, with a forecast volume under 20K cars per year, which they are currently nowhere near.

I think the part of my message you replied to still applies. Tesla has up to 4 or 5 years before the competition starts to really squeeze. That would be 2023. The charging issue will have been made moot by then with lots of investment by the non-Tesla markets. All of the major players will have significant entries in various form factors by then. Heck, even EV truck companies should have vehicles out by then. Once that happens Tesla has to be on top of the market in a big way hitting on all eight cylinders, so to speak. If they continue like they have done so far, with volume production a nearly a year late and poor performance with support and service, they will get a bad reputation with the masses that will be very hard to overcome.

Yeah, anyone can say Tesla will do well for the "foreseeable" future, meaning the next four or five years, but if they don't keep on top of things during that period, they can lose their present huge advantage. You may not "see" much going on with big iron in Europe, but I can assure you they are ducks, calm on the surface, and paddling like hell underneath. Simply put, they aren't stupid. Anyone can see the handwriting on the wall at this point.
 
Opened 16 in the US so far in December. 4 in California. 48 permits plus 29 under construction in the US - that we know about.

Take a breath people.

Notice the density of superchargers in the Bay Area?

upload_2018-12-23_8-28-1.png
 
Opened 16 in the US so far in December. 4 in California. 48 permits plus 29 under construction in the US - that we know about.

Take a breath people.

Notice the density of superchargers in the Bay Area?

View attachment 363348

You post those numbers as if they are good. 48 permits can take half a year to turn into Superchargers. Once they start construction it typically goes faster, but still months. So these numbers are actually in line with the existing numbers and don't constitute a ramp up in the number of Supercharger installations in 2019... yet.

Yeah, time to breath because you don't want to hold your breath waiting for the end to Supercharger congestion.
 
Yes, agree on that. I think the assumption is that when it was quoted he used a "home charger" that the person was referring to a wall charger and not the mobile charger. Maybe he was using the mobile charger. If so, then I wonder why he wouldn't have installed a Tesla wall charger instead of returning the car. Most homes will have a way to add at least a 30 or 40 amp breaker for charging which will give quite a bit of overnight charge.

Perhaps Aspen can elaborate on his numbers. I'm thinking that if the owner had a 48 amp wall charger and the same 48 amp version in the car (not the upgraded 72 amp version), then he should be able to gain at least 200 miles over a 10 hour home evening and night time charge. I have a 60 amp breaker and charging at 48 amps 240VAC and that's what I get.

I forgot he was talking about model X and not model 3 so I was puzzled about why my estimate was so low. And yes since he mentioned 'home' that meant he would be able to install wall charger. But since model X tops at only 30 miles per hour on the wall charger the 8 hour charge would give him 240 miles. Originally I think I have looked up wrong number and used Model S charge rate which would give 264 miles (I seem to remember coming up with this number) and 200/264 would give almost 25% range loss which I lowballed to 20%. Going with X numbers you only have about 17% to play in winter.
 
You may not "see" much going on with big iron in Europe, but I can assure you they are ducks, calm on the surface, and paddling like hell underneath. Simply put, they aren't stupid. Anyone can see the handwriting on the wall at this point.

I'm not too sure about that. VW were stupid enough to cheat on the diesel emissions tests and now they are admitting in public that their EV plans are not moving fast enough to cope with future legislation. Bleating openly to their own government to back off on EV progression because it's going to hurt their business and jobs etc. That to me doesn't sound like a very positive attitude to the introduction of mass market EVs. Of course their marketing dept is in full swing talking about a greener future and cheaper, higher quality EVs, throwing around all sorts of big numbers, but it looks like BS to me.

Of course there will be competition for Tesla in the next 5 years, but I don't think it's going to be all that mind-blowing. Not that I'm bothered either way as I would welcome some choice when I next change my car.
 
What? The production race is not about the government subsidy. If that were the case they would have slow peddled last quarter to put the 200,000 mark into the first day of Q4, then the $7500 rebate would last through Q1!

It's about making big bucks so the company can survive.


Umm. Have you been paying attention this year? That's *exactly* what Tesla did, offset by 3 months - they slowed sales and stockpiled production at the end of quarter 2, so they hit the 200k mark in the first week of July and maximized the number of people who can get the rebate.

The only way they could have waited for the start of Q4 is to deliver nothing at all in the US in Q3.
 
Umm. Have you been paying attention this year? That's *exactly* what Tesla did, offset by 3 months - they slowed sales and stockpiled production at the end of quarter 2, so they hit the 200k mark in the first week of July and maximized the number of people who can get the rebate.

The only way they could have waited for the start of Q4 is to deliver nothing at all in the US in Q3.

Lol! If anything they were pushing cars out the door so fast they couldn't deliver them fast enough, but I never saw any indication they were holding back on sales. Someone did point out they started selling in Canada which may have been to prevent crossing the 200,000 threshold, but that's not holding back sales.

In Q3 Tesla was in a mad rush to deliver as many cars as they could to do two things. First was to record as much profit as they could to look good to the share holders. Second was to records as much profit as they could to crap all over the shorts and I'm not certain of that order!

Any production that was "stockpiled" was likely a mismatch between what they could make and what they could sell at the highest profit. With the choke point being the delivery time they wanted to sell as many cars with the highest markup. Now that may have let them accomplish both their maximum profit goal as well as forestalling crossing the threshold. But at no time did they cut deliveries and profits to stretch the rebates.

You have to look at Tesla realistically. This year they have been operating in panic mode. I expect they still are although at least their heads are above water. This is not a well oiled organization. Give them a few years to reach that point if ever.
 
You post those numbers as if they are good.
Because they ARE good!

16 opened in the month of December (through December 23)! Open superchargers is all the matters - nothing else is real.

Sometimes they just "open" without anyone noticing contruction.
Sometimes there are permits for a year with no action, or contruction that goes on for months.

But opening 16 locations and 188 stalls in the first 23 days of December is real. And it is good.

Assume they sell 30,000 cars in December and add 188 stalls. Assume each stall delivers 720kWh per day - that would be 60kW per stall for 12 hours at a regular supercharger, or 72kW for 10 hours at an urban supercharger. That would be enough additional capacity to provide 6,000 miles annually to each new car delivered, or roughly half their charging needs. 50% supercharging greatly exceeds any estimate of the average amount of charging I have ever seen.

So, they are adding supercharger capacity faster than the rate they are selling cars.

Yes, Virginia, those numbers are good. And there IS a Santa Claus. Happy Holidays to all. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jboy210
The only thing holding back sales of the M3 is production right now. Same through 2019 as they increase production and begin international (beyond Canada) sales.

The delivery crazyness in the US will ease substantially through the first half of 2019. The US order backlog will have been filled, and deliveries in the US will decline slightly (just my guess), while at the same time they add delivery capacity. When Y deliveries start a year or so from now, they should have a lot more delivery capacity and be better prepared.
 
The US order backlog will have been filled, and deliveries in the US will decline slightly (just my guess)

If by that you mean US demand will decline slightly, I would guess the opposite. I fully expect the momentum for M3 demand to grow as the word spreads and ICE owners start to think twice about ordering another one. The potential market for the M3 is way larger than the keen EV reservation holders, so I don't think clearing that initial backlog will make much difference to ongoing demand, which should remain well ahead of production capacity for the next few years at least. There could be a growing waiting list for custom orders before long. I'm just guessing too of course!
 
If by that you mean US demand will decline slightly, I would guess the opposite.
You may be right - that is why I said slightly. I believe the MS/MX volumes held until they plateaued, with no decline.

With the M3 I think they filled the order backlog more quickly due to a faster production ramp, and may not be able to deliver 4x the Q4 US deliveries in the US in 2019. Worldwide deliveries will be whatever they can produce.

If they deliver a $35,000 model in the US in 2019, that would change my opinion. I think that would expand the market enough that they would increase over the Q4 delivery rate.
 
We don't really know the numbers on locals vs travelers using superchargers (SCs), but Tesla does. (Or does anyone know what percentage of supercharger use at a particular SC in the bay area is a local, someone with a close zip code, vs travelers?)

My suggestions are:
* if everyone who could charge at home paid a bit of money to install and use charging at home, maybe the remaining people, locals who have some real impediments to home charging, would be manageable and not create a situation that hurts travelers using SCs.
* end free supercharging ASAP. Free supercharging encourages "bad" behavior. Buy-out people who have free supercharging in impacted zip codes. (buy out their free SC use, i mean.)

But, the thing is, do any of use really know the extent of local use of SCs?
 
Last edited:
I'm not too sure about that. VW were stupid enough to cheat on the diesel emissions tests and now they are admitting in public that their EV plans are not moving fast enough to cope with future legislation. Bleating openly to their own government to back off on EV progression because it's going to hurt their business and jobs etc. That to me doesn't sound like a very positive attitude to the introduction of mass market EVs. Of course their marketing dept is in full swing talking about a greener future and cheaper, higher quality EVs, throwing around all sorts of big numbers, but it looks like BS to me.

Of course there will be competition for Tesla in the next 5 years, but I don't think it's going to be all that mind-blowing. Not that I'm bothered either way as I would welcome some choice when I next change my car.

More than VW cheated. The whole German Auto Industry has cars with the defeat devices, this include BMW and Mercedes. According to my friends in Germany, Bosch is believed to be the source of the software and sensors in the defeat devices.
 
Last edited:
The only thing holding back sales of the M3 is production right now. Same through 2019 as they increase production and begin international (beyond Canada) sales.

The delivery crazyness in the US will ease substantially through the first half of 2019. The US order backlog will have been filled, and deliveries in the US will decline slightly (just my guess), while at the same time they add delivery capacity. When Y deliveries start a year or so from now, they should have a lot more delivery capacity and be better prepared.

Agree about the Y. The sedan market, even for EVs, is a smaller market. Customers in the US want SUV and Crossover, and Truck EVs. The Y should sell very well. But the window of opportunity is closing for Tesla. Hyundai's Kona will come in around $36,000 before the tax credit, and Hyundai has nearly it full 200,000 EV credit allowance to sell.

I can see the Kona replacing the Toyota Rav-4 and it's competitors, like Subaru in the small basic SUV/CUV market. I expect the Tesla Y to replace the Lexus RX, BMW X3, and other similar small luxury SUV/CUV.