-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla BEV Competition Developments
- Thread starter uselesslogin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- TSLA
jhm
Well-Known Member
Might I recommend to GM the name "Jiggawatt" and that they make it look like a time travelling Delorian?
I'm betting that [1] someone (or some many) in Audi cursed when discovering that the 2012 e-Tron couldn't compete with Tesla's P85, [2] someone (or some many) at Audi kept plugging away and was(/were) quite proud of the "new" e-tron, and [3] sometime in the next year or two someone (or some many) at Audi will look up and realize that the new one can't compete with the P85D (and maybe not even a 2012 P85 still). Sad.
I actually delayed putting in my order for my Model S until it was all-too-clear that Audi wasn't going to release an e-tron. Yes, I like Audis, and the Model S was still vaporware (well, they had delivered the first 10 Founder cars, but...). So there is some benefit to Audi and other established OEMs in stringing people along.
article about Daimler and Audi coming out of Geneva Motor Show,
German automakers shift focus to high-end electric cars - Yahoo Finance
favorite snippet as an investor is reporting of Daimler CEO Dieter Zetche's remarks, (sorry Elon),
"The electric car industry may still gain traction, but it will take time, Zetsche added. "This is an industry where the cycle takes 14 or 21 years to become really strong and relevant," he told reporters."
This is quite consistent with what can be thought of as the "slow motion disruption" of the auto industry. The incumbents have so much invested in engineering, workforce, and plants for ICE vehicles, (as well as a sense of comfort and identity in the business they've known for decades) they have massive incentives to move slowly. Unlike, the disruptions we've all seen over the past 20 years (digital cameras, netflix, smartphones,...), the incumbent automakers can get away with dragging their feet as even 10 years from now long range EVs are unlikely to reach 10% market share. As I've said before, I strongly doubt the opening Tesla has to grow into will be squeezed at all by competing products before 2030.
German automakers shift focus to high-end electric cars - Yahoo Finance
favorite snippet as an investor is reporting of Daimler CEO Dieter Zetche's remarks, (sorry Elon),
"The electric car industry may still gain traction, but it will take time, Zetsche added. "This is an industry where the cycle takes 14 or 21 years to become really strong and relevant," he told reporters."
This is quite consistent with what can be thought of as the "slow motion disruption" of the auto industry. The incumbents have so much invested in engineering, workforce, and plants for ICE vehicles, (as well as a sense of comfort and identity in the business they've known for decades) they have massive incentives to move slowly. Unlike, the disruptions we've all seen over the past 20 years (digital cameras, netflix, smartphones,...), the incumbent automakers can get away with dragging their feet as even 10 years from now long range EVs are unlikely to reach 10% market share. As I've said before, I strongly doubt the opening Tesla has to grow into will be squeezed at all by competing products before 2030.
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
To be honest I absolutely love this statement by Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche because of:
Some people still do not get it.
I think Zetsche's statement is way too simple, thus it has to be wrong to some extent.
As to my opinion Zetsche's remark at least absolutely ignores the following three facts:
- There is no such thing as "the cycles in the automotive industry" (like 14 to 21 years).
The real world is a lot more complex than just one big innovation cylce lasting 14 to 21 years.
Reason: There is no more such thing as "the car" nowadays.
New cars consist of a lot of different technological advanced parts (like engine injection system, suspension, airbag system, navigation system, seats, paint, even floor carpets, ...).
All these parts evolve at their very own innovation rate and thus have their very own innovation cycle.
For example while engine injection systems evolved at a much slower rate, navigation systems evolved at a much quicker rate during the recent years.
And this is just extrapolating from the past, not considering any event of new disruptive technology.
- While Zetsche might be right that in general innovation cylces in automotive industry might be several years (new vehicle model year shown about every 8 years),
general innovation cylces in computer technology and battery / power electronics are a lot shorter (like digital cameras, data rates for your mobile phone and so on).
- It is incorrect that Tesla is working on electric powertrain for a short time / short innovation cycle.
Tesla has some know how from early days EV development from GM (EV1), AC-Propulsion, as well as lots of time spent in house on patents on their electric powertrain.
This advance over potential competition should not me underestimated.
The invention of the automobile has been disruptive.
The integration of the automobile into your home power system like with your smartphone is the next big disruption in the automotive business.
According to my opinion, there is currently a massive disruption taking place in automotive industry.
And it seems like almost nobody is taking care about it (ok, some people get it, like Carlos Ghosn from Nissan and a few others
).Just try to put this disruption into perspective by comparing it to the impact of other important innovations during automotive history like:
Direct injection in engines, turbo engines, diesel engines, AWD, ABS brake systems, airbag systems?!
This new electric propulsion powertrain is a lot more disruptive than all other innovations in the automotive business and beyond (energy supply sector) than anything of the above mentioned, to my opinion.
You don't believe it?
Get a Model S for a test drive, take a seat in the drivers seat, floor the pedal, smile and you'll know it by heart in less than a second!
Go on a road trip, try one of these SuperChargers and whatch the carging rate with your own eyes!
... just my 2cents.
We should be careful in parsing what exactly the Model S is changing in the industry; it's more than just one thing:
- Converting the power train from petroleum to electric
- Modernizing car controls and software
- Advancing the place of cars in the "internet of things"
- Replacing an outdated distributions system with direct sales
I think implementing no 1. is the only variable facing the hurdle. The other variables are likely to happen sooner rather than later, with or without Tesla.
The electric power train has to overcome huge hurdle and resistance to win its place in the market. In order to succeed Tesla needs any tailwinds it can get or generate with other improvements.
I have at times asked the same question, but backwards: How compelling would it be if Tesla had done ONLY 2-4? A new exciting car company rethinking everything but still using ICE drivetrains. I probably would have shopped that car (it would be much cheaper to buy). I think it is half #1, half 2-4.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Their cost for ICE powertrains would be much much higher, whether developed in house or purchased, than the legacy OEMs likely resulting in an overall higher price despite cheaper cost where they are innovative. They still pay higher price for basic things like seats, steel, wheels, glass, tires, interior trim , carpet etc.
They would have very few allies in state legislatures for exemption to franchise dealer laws save a few libertarian leaning Republicans. Many of the exemptions specifically name all electric powertrains as a requirement.
Then they just get crushed by economies of scale of the legacy OEMs who eventually adopt innovations in software,controls,and internet of things.
Then Elon becomes another Delorean,Tucker, Kaiser etc.
SebastianR
Active Member
Very good train of thoughts. In my case I would not have been interested in that car at all. My Audi doesn't come with 2-4 but it would not have pushed me "over the edge" to switch to a different brand.
I think what happens is that competitors look at 1 to 4 and say: hey we ("try to") do 2-4, too! Buy our car! - to me that's not good enough. And 4 I can resolve myself today by buying a used vehicle.
This would have happened eventually. It was kind of obvious. It saves a fortune on parts and assembly.
This isn't even a good idea, and the "internet of things" is going to be quickly backed away from as the security issues are properly understood.
This... is interesting. Elon has explained that he did this specifically because the dealership system was resistant to selling electric cars, because it cut into their existing business.
So I think this was always destined to happen specifically as a side-effect of the drivetrain change.
The existing manufacturers continue to try to avoid selling electric cars: they are designing them specifically to not compete with existing product lines. The dealers are probably to be a major source of this conservatism.
I think #4 was inevitable for anyone trying to do #1 (as explained above). I think #3 is a bad idea. Not doing #2 wouldn't have changed how compelling the model S was -- but it would have reduced Tesla's profit margins by increasing costs!
- - - Updated - - -
Well, rumor has it that the "new" e-tron is still priced to be *more expensive* than an S85. And I don't see anything which would make it more attractive for most buyers.
I am suspicious that Audi, like the other ICE manufacturers, is still trying to not cannibalize its existing fuel-engine market. This is, honestly, Tesla's big advantage: nobody's seriously trying to compete. I keep expecting some company to *seriously* try to compete, but it has not happened yet. I keep watching for one of the old-line car companies to figure out that it's time: When to Cannibalize Your Existing Products | BYD figured out that it was time to cannibalize their gas-car market, but they're Chinese and face huge hurdles in exporting to developed countries, so they'll be 10 years behind.
- - - Updated - - -
I actually found a very long article running through every single battery-electric vehicle currently on the market or announced for the next year, and explaining exactly how each one had been crippled in order to prevent it from selling.
--- Many of them had had their trim / fit / finish deliberately downgraded relative to the most obvious gasoline-car comparison of the same make.
--- Others had had their price deliberately raised relative to the most obvious gasoline-car comparison in the same make, and raised by more than the expected gasoline savings.
--- The Nissan Leaf was the only one which seemed to be designed to be even slightly competitive with other models in the same product line, and it is specifically targeted at the bottom of the market.
Unfortunately I didn't save the link.
But basically, there's no competition to Tesla because none of the big companies are willing to cannibalize their existing high-margin luxury car product lines. As long as this attitude keeps up, the only potential competition would be from another new-start company, and all of them are 10 years behind Tesla, or have failed already for other reasons (poor old Aptera).
Last edited:
Before I went on a long trip with superchargers, I would have agreed fully with the list. But I have to add #5, superchargers change everything. With their use, it's a *BETTER* way to travel (yes yes, a day's driving will take maybe an hour or so longer, but you're much more relaxed from the two or three half-hour breaks and not fatigued at the end of the day -- to me a far safer and more pleasant journey). So they take the Model S and future vehicles from a great around-town driving experience to a great car, period, a better solution than ICE in every way. In my humble opinion, of course.
^[/LIST]
Before I went on a long trip with superchargers, I would have agreed fully with the list. But I have to add #5, superchargers change everything. With their use, it's a *BETTER* way to travel (yes yes, a day's driving will take maybe an hour or so longer, but you're much more relaxed from the two or three half-hour breaks and not fatigued at the end of the day -- to me a far safer and more pleasant journey). So they take the Model S and future vehicles from a great around-town driving experience to a great car, period, a better solution than ICE in every way. In my humble opinion, of course.
I enjoy reading this type of response from current Tesla owners.
As a retiree, I was looking for one EV vehicle that could handle long trips as well as my in-town activities. You stated one of the reasons I decided on the MX over competitive EVs.
...found one of the articles about the lack of real competition. http://seekingalpha.com/article/2914226-tesla-real-competition-ahead?%29
I was planning to pay cash. Although I don't perceive financing to be a problem, who wants debts in retirement? I've got several months to decide (unfortunately).
Similar threads
