Tesla BEV Competition Developments

[Quant]

GM buys self-driving technology startup Cruise for $1 Billion.

By all accounts, these guys are the real deal. It remains to be seen whether GM is capable of rejuvenating itself with young blood transfusions like this.

Since Cruise has been largely focused on retrofitting existing cars on the road with autonomous diving kits, they will need quite a bit of additional time, talent and money to develop an integrated software for GM's portfolio of cars on the OEM's new car platforms, and very crucially coordinate a lot with GM R&D teams, interpersonally.

I think GM overpaid substantially, and given the culture and org structure of GM, I expect there will be some interpersonal challenges for the 40 odd Cruise employees (who ALL now will be large multi millionaires from this deal) and the existing GM staff, since monetarily the GM R&D programmers/ staff/managers will be left sucking their individual and collective thumbs, and be taken over by the Cruise hot-shots. Cultural and integration issues will abound with the GM new car design teams !

So, at least 12-18 months after the deal is completed, or end of 2017.

Wonder where Musk and his autonomous driving teams will be by the end of 2017 vs. GM or Ford?

 

[The Blue Owl]

Since Cruise has been largely focused on retrofitting existing cars on the road with autonomous diving kits, they will need quite a bit of additional time, talent and money to develop an integrated software for GM's portfolio of cars on the OEM's new car platforms, and very crucially coordinate a lot with GM R&D teams, interpersonally.

I think GM overpaid substantially, and given the culture and org structure of GM, I expect there will be some interpersonal challenges for the 40 odd Cruise employees (who ALL now will be large multi millionaires from this deal) and the existing GM staff, since monetarily the GM R&D programmers/ staff/managers will be left sucking their individual and collective thumbs, and be taken over by the Cruise hot-shots. Cultural and integration issues will abound with the GM new car design teams !

I agree, for all the reasons you mentioned. I am skeptical of GM's ability to absorb Cruise. Really, the only way is to ensure that the Cruise people absorb the relevant sections of GM, the way Pixar took over the animation department at Disney, for example, or how the NeXT acquisition transformed Apple, but that's unlikely to happen. The top GM management seems to understand where they need to go, but my sense is that the cultural baggage of a company like GM will be impossible to overcome. (OTOH, if they pull it off, it will be one of the greatest corporate transformations ever.)

 

[Johan]

BMW allegedly going with Rex (Range extender ICE) for the i5. All according to iBoss Wenders:

BMW i Chief: Larger i Models Will Offer Optional Range-Extender

 

[BornToFly]

BMW allegedly going with Rex (Range extender ICE) for the i5. All according to iBoss Wenders:

BMW i Chief: Larger i Models Will Offer Optional Range-Extender

When you don't have a supercharger network, you have to give people a car with an entire ICE generator to lug around and maintain, and take up valuable space in the vehicle....

 

[esk8mw]

I agree, for all the reasons you mentioned. I am skeptical of GM's ability to absorb Cruise. Really, the only way is to ensure that the Cruise people absorb the relevant sections of GM, the way Pixar took over the animation department at Disney, for example, or how the NeXT acquisition transformed Apple, but that's unlikely to happen. The top GM management seems to understand where they need to go, but my sense is that the cultural baggage of a company like GM will be impossible to overcome. (OTOH, if they pull it off, it will be one of the greatest corporate transformations ever.)

Agree on all counts. Also, GM has expressed extreme skepticism (and pearl clutching about safety) regarding over the air updates. I cannot comprehend how any version of autonomous driving can survive without frequent updating. Do they really plan to develop it all on the front end to account for all possible scenarios? This would take a very long time to prepare and it still fall behind the curve soon after release if updates are not provided. Or do they release it half-cocked and ask owners to come back to the shop every month to get updates? Neither sounds appealing.

 

[The Blue Owl]

Agree on all counts. Also, GM has expressed extreme skepticism (and pearl clutching about safety) regarding over the air updates. I cannot comprehend how any version of autonomous driving can survive without frequent updating. Do they really plan to develop it all on the front end to account for all possible scenarios? This would take a very long time to prepare and it still fall behind the curve soon after release if updates are not provided. Or do they release it half-cocked and ask owners to come back to the shop every month to get updates? Neither sounds appealing.

I watched Mary Barra talking about GM's "cautious approach" regarding cyber-security. I'm sure they will have OTA updates. My take at the time was that it was a way to justify why they are late to the market, and at the same time subtly imply that maybe other car companies who jumped in with both feet may not be as cautious (hint, hint).

 

[McRat]

It's not just Barra. SAE is in hot debates about it as are all the car mfrs who have had digital controls and 2-way telemetry available for a long time now. 2 way telemetry with reflash ability dates back to 2004 for GM, not sure for other brands. It's just not implemented.

2002-2016 = 9 cars with >1/2 a million miles combined and 14 years without needing bug fixes to the software? Most are advanced models. Cheapest was >$50k in 2002 dollars, most expensive $126k in 2010 dollars.

Exactly why do you need to reflash if the you get the software correct before the sale? Note, I cannot remember ever having to reboot any of them due to software bugs while operating.

I guess some people assume modern cars have buggy as shiit factory software. They don't.

The biggest reason today to have OTA reflashes is changes to the infotainment console.

 

[The Blue Owl]

Exactly why do you need to reflash if the you get the software correct before the sale? Note, I cannot remember ever having to reboot any of them due to software bugs while operating.

I guess some people assume modern cars have buggy as shiit factory software. They don't.

The biggest reason today to have OTA reflashes is changes to the infotainment console.

It's not only (or even primarily) about bugs or cosmetic changes, but about functionality. In the case of Tesla, reflashes have been having much more significant impact than what you describe, the most obvious example being improvements to the Autopilot.

 

[McRat]

It's not only (or even primarily) about bugs or cosmetic changes, but about functionality. In the case of Tesla, reflashes have been having much more significant impact than what you describe, the most obvious example being improvements to the Autopilot.

Currently ACC and lane keep is very limited for GM. But I would not be surprised if they don't need updates since the ELR is the test bed, and the CTF (captured test fleet) cars are testing as we speak. When GM released one of the first 3D Active Handling packages at the turn of the century, I don't remember updates, but they tested the crap out of it. "Updates" required hardware refinement, not just code, so it advanced by new systems in following models.

There are definitely two schools of thought about software development. One is late release after extensive refinement, and the other is quick release with updates.

 

[dalalsid]

It's not just Barra. SAE is in hot debates about it as are all the car mfrs who have had digital controls and 2-way telemetry available for a long time now. 2 way telemetry with reflash ability dates back to 2004 for GM, not sure for other brands. It's just not implemented.

2002-2016 = 9 cars with >1/2 a million miles combined and 14 years without needing bug fixes to the software? Most are advanced models. Cheapest was >$50k in 2002 dollars, most expensive $126k in 2010 dollars.

Exactly why do you need to reflash if the you get the software correct before the sale? Note, I cannot remember ever having to reboot any of them due to software bugs while operating.

I guess some people assume modern cars have buggy as shiit factory software. They don't.

The biggest reason today to have OTA reflashes is changes to the infotainment console.

You've never had a software related recall? My 2013 leaf had at least 2. And 2015 leaf has at least one expected soon. Did you hear about the Chrysler hacking recall? This is one reason you need OTA flashing. So you don't need to make a trip to a dealer. Plus a lot of car software is buggy as heck, especially related to Bluetooth. It's not an assumption. It is reality.

There is no such thing as 100% correct software.

 

[McRat]

You've never had a software related recall? My 2013 leaf had at least 2. And 2015 leaf has at least one expected soon. Did you hear about the Chrysler hacking recall? This is one reason you need OTA flashing. So you don't need to make a trip to a dealer. Plus a lot of car software is buggy as heck, especially related to Bluetooth. It's not an assumption. It is reality.

There is no such thing as 100% correct software.

Nope, never had a mandatory reflash so far. Lots of cars, lots of years. I think I have 9? ECM controlled vehicles currently. Note however, I have dealer level access and both OEM and aftermarket flashing devices, and a handful of spare ECMs on the shelf. So I often "customize" my ECMs to fit my needs.

One car had a "pre-delivery" flash for a minor issue.

Yes, there is no 100% bug free code. However, not all code is created equal. There is buggy code, and there is stable code, and everything in between.

We are so accustomed today of getting buggy code in our digital devices that we have adapted to constant updates. And we have accepted the occasional screw-ups with updates. So far, most cars are not seeing this yet. Heaven help us if we end up with cars that act like our consumer electronics. Have you got a spare ECM on the shelf?

 

[dakh]

The actual engine control is a tiny fraction of the volume of code that runs on a car like Model S. It is also tested to a very different standard than say the entertainment system. In my experience a lot of what I saw of the latter is pretty wobbly and would definitely benefit from updating with bugfixes and better thought out features. And we're not even talking about autopilot stuff which definitely is evolving fast enough to pretty much require frequent updates. How would it feel if a collision is not avoided but there's a newer version of the software that would have helped avoiding it -- just wasn't installed?

 

[tftf]

Dyson and Swatch work on new battery tech (beyond Li-Ion) in advanced stages, Dyson may even create its own EV:

1) Dyson

Government documents reveal Dyson is making an electric car

and

Dyson Challenges Tesla With $1.4 Billion Battery Tech Investment

2) Swatch

Swatch Mulls Battery IPO as Volkswagen Scandal Boosts Interest

and

Swatch produira ses batteries dès juillet (French, battery pilot production starting later this year)

 

[Gerardf]

Dyson and Swatch work on new battery tech (beyond Li-Ion) in advanced stages, Dyson may even create its own EV:

1) Dyson
Government documents reveal Dyson is making an electric car
any
Dyson Challenges Tesla With $1.4 Billion Battery Tech Investment


2) Swatch

Swatch Mulls Battery IPO as Volkswagen Scandal Boosts Interest
and
Swatch produira ses batteries dès juillet (French, battery pilot production starting later this year)

Dyson is the Sakti "solid state" batteries. I have still not seen any commercial battery from them. So far it it seem to be small prototypes only, far from a usable and economic production-ready car battery.

Noone has seen a Swatch battery either. It is not clear what batteries Swatch will produce in their pilot plant. They mention cars, but in the French article I see they have experience with the technology for Bluetooth applications. I am getting the impression the are after securing funding because the HOPE they can scale up their technology.

So far all we know is claimed numbers. Impressive numbers, but zero proof and very little information. The trick is not only to make a battery with high capacity, it must also have high energy density (per size and weight), high C-rate, keep charge after a high number of cycles and (last but not least) a price below $100,-- / kWh for cells.

I would like to see one of such optimistic claims come true one day, but until then they are all Slideware and of very little (if not zero) impact to Tesla / TSLA, who already Has all the above features in proven technology today in use in 100.000+ cars with on average 80 kWh batteries each. (for price to hit that mark the GigaFactory has to ramp up the planned quantity).


And when the days comes that such Dyson or Swatch (or similar) technology is validated and ready for production, Tesla will be the first company they will have contacted to license the technology to, possibly to become a Tesla GigaFactory partner. The alternative would be to become a car manufacturer themselves, as Dyson claims. That would need "quite a bit" of scaling up comming from vacuum cleaners.

 

[RobStark]

Anne Marie Sastry sold a near production ready revolutionary battery technology that will render the equipment inside the GF obsolete to Dyson for $15M.

 

[tftf]

You conveniently forgot about the $90 million (on top of the prior $15 million) and the upcoming $1billion plus Dyson plans to invest. Dyson has the scale and funds to finance the ramp-up - they also have extensive in-house knowledge of coneventional battery tech.

Neither Swatch nor Dyson are small amateurs in need of cheap battery PR wins (to get more funding etc.) - and in contrast to Tesla both companies deliver healthy operating profits.

 

[RobStark]

You conveniently forgot about the $90 million (on top of the prior $15 million) and the upcoming $1billion plus Dyson plans to invest.

I referenced what was in the link you provided.

Even at $105M, it is nothing for what Sastry has been claiming.

She is on video claiming her tech will make Tesla battery pack tech obsolete.

If that where true her company would be worth billions.

BTW Dyson's plan to invest $1B has nothing with the value of Sakti3 intellectual property as it stands today. If they purchased for $105M that is the agreed upon value between Sastry and Dyson.

 

[kenliles]

Dyson may even create its own EV

By definition, Wouldn't a Dyson EV...
well, Suck?

 

[BornToFly]

I guess the increase in the stock price has hurt tftf enough that he had to crawl out of his hole again to spew more garbage.

 

[austinEV]

Something I think about at times: If there was some new solid-state 4x higher density battery tech that came out that was manufacturable, the first factories wouldn't make car batteries. They would make smartphone batteries. The profit/gram is MUCH higher. So set your BS detectors to this.