Tesla, TSLA & the Investment World: the Perpetual Investors' Roundtable

[woodisgood]

Yes I agree. My concern is the 4680's are not progressing as well as projected and/or the structural battery pack isn't.

Or perhaps 4680s are coming along swimmingly but it remains a fluid decision as to where to direct the first production of those cells and which vehicle(s) to engineer a structural battery pack for.

EDIT to say: Trust me, you'd rather have 10-20K CTs rolling out of Austin before year-end instead of Plaid+.

 

[Krugerrand]

That's ICE thinking: Mileage= smaller, lighter, less power, more efficiency, cheaper. "Range" doesn't matter because you can fill up in 5 minutes anywhere.

EV thinking: Range= larger battery pack, more power, expensive. "Range" does matter, range has a value in EV's that it does not in an ICE for obvious reasons.

Until energy density increases and cost decreases to some level you can't use ICE thinking and apply it to EVs.

Uh huh, so weight difference between an S/X and 3/Y has nothing do with it? Come on, I said all other things being equal. Let’s not add to the angst on the board today arguing something you know we’re both making valid points about.

I acknowledge how you (and some others) feel about the ‘maybe not’ (because we don’t know yet) 500 mile range S, while I sit over here with a bunch of peeps not giving a flip.

 

[jkirkwood001]

I wouldn’t complain. Smaller cars have tended to always get better mileage than bigger cars, all other stuffs being equal.

I’m calling it. Plaid will be the last variant and refresh for S. In another 7ish years when peeps start complaining again that it’s long in the tooth, Tesla will be pumping out millions of 3, Y, 2, truck and semi every year. Will have additional factories built and being built to the current ones and so many other things going on...S’s and Xs be transitioning to collector items.

Oh way to Osborne the Model S launch Thursday, @Krugerrand !

 

[TheTalkingMule]

The head of Tesla Energy has left the company. Not sure if pushed out or not.

Fred is implying he's been heading to a startup for a couple months and just now officially left. Funny, I didn't even really know this guy existed.

He's got an Army background then onto the sales/busdev side of utilities. Not sure why anyone thought a sales-side person would fit this role. Anywho....he's only been around for a year, hopefully we can move on to someone with a bit grander vision than someone with a sales-heavy background(no offense salespeople!)

I'd be open to the position if no one's willing to stand in front of the Elon firing line!

 

[Beltsbear]

4680’s should have 20% better charging capability than existing 2170’s.

From Battery Day: 6X Power / 5X Energy = 1.2X Power Density.

However if they can apply tabless and other improvements to 18650’s or 2170’s, those should have even better power characteristics than 4680’s albeit more expensive and possibly less energy dense.

Power density is not the same as charging capability. Charging capability would be the ability to quickly charge given a certain battery size. Apples to Apples, as in 100kWh battery vs 100kWh battery. Those being equal, the 2170's could charge at a higher rate, even with the 2170's using traditional tabs and the 4680's using tabless. Now a 4680 battery at 100kWh would almost certainly be lighter, which would mean better performance and longer range, but that is not the same as 'charging capability'. Also the 2170 cells themselves that are used in Tesla's have a higher charging capability then is being used today. It is held back by wire size/weight tradeoffs and cooling capability (pack not cell) limits. The 4680 cells initially will be charging much closer to the cells theoretical peak vs the 2170. Again, at the CELL level not the pack level.

4680 is better due to cost and weight reductions, but with all tech applied to the 2170 being equal to the 4680 (chemistry, and tabless) the 2170 would be the higher performing cell in a performance car.

 

[StealthP3D]

Q1: Wasn't the Plaid+ needed to beat the Porsche Taycan track time?
Q2: Does the Plaid still beat the Taycan?

Oh, come on now, let's get real. Everyone knows a non-performance manufacture isn't going to beat the latest and greatest electric car from the manufacture that has one of the most storied racing careers in the history of auto racing and has been building hot blooded sports cars for longer than you have been alive! Not with a four door family sedan. From a little upstart manufacturer? At less than half the price?

Oh, wait...maybe it can?

 

[Rb48888]

I believe there was an announcement about the Plaid+, said announcement being generally regarded as a negative influence on the SP.

That's what they want you to believe [/tinfoil]

Seriously though... It seems probable that the plaid will be somewhat better than the original specs (maybe range, maybe surprise features, we don't know).

Maybe a lot of plaid+ orders will not be satisfied with the production-release Plaid, but most will still buy the next Tesla that fits their needs. That's ok, they weren't buying until next year anyway. Some number of plaid+ orders will now take plaid sooner. Some folks with LR orders may even jump to plaid if there are better reasons to do so. (I may change from LR to plaid X depending on what happens this week with the Plaid S)

Selling more high-margin cars sooner should be good for the SP... Unless the market is suddenly thinking long term. I call BS.

IMHO - Usual players magnifying controversy and exaggerating the dip for personal gain, and some speculative traders bailing because they had unrealistic expectations (surprise 4680 early-release, etc).

 

[MABMAB]

I will be a happy person when first new cells get road tested and YouTubed reviewed. That period of time could mark a substantial change in transportation history.

 

[Unpilot]

Actual spy picture of @Krugerrand deciding what next to post.

 

[enzo]

It seems lost on people that the original promise made at Battery Day was Plaid by end-of-2021. It is now arriving significantly early. (The range may differ from promised, but remains to be seen). The underlying cells do not really matter to fulfilling the product launch.

 

[Krugerrand]

All these discussions are welcomed and healthy....but let's not forget who lands rockets for a living

This is a great reminder. I also would remind people, who think doing it a different way would somehow make things better, the recent CNBC headlines about in cabin camera status.

Not turned on - Tesla bad and unsafe
Turned on - Tesla bad and spying

More Zen: It’s a lie you tell yourself when you believe had such and such just done it this way, the way you think it should have been done, that things would have been all rosy. No. That’s not how it works. Invariably you just come up with a different/other reason to be upset because human nature. It’s a lot harder to detach yourself from the selfishness of the situation and see it clearly and for what it really is; irrelevant.

 

[mongo]

Yes I agree. My concern is the 4680's are not progressing as well as projected and/or the structural battery pack isn't.

That is one possibility. Another is this:
More power output (kW or hp) usually requires more cells which means more energy (kWh), and so the range can be a side effect of performance as opposed to a direct design goal "we must have 500+ range" (see also the Roadster).
So, it could be the redesigned smaller cell based pack performs so well that the gap in power based performance (0-60, quarter mile, top speed) between it and a 4680 based version is so small as to not be worth it. It could also be they are using 4680s, but less of them due to more favorable power vs energy density.
If the drive units or tires are the limiting factor, adding cells only to extend range may be a poor allocation of limited resources versus increasing production capacity 30%.
Older gen cells (esp is made tabless) would allow for a shorter pack, which has benefits from packaging and aero standpoints.

 

[Cherry Wine]

Twitter post purporting to leak CPCA numbers for May:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1401934629548998661

As a reminder, April CPCA numbers were 25,845, with 14,174 of those being exports.

 

[Krugerrand]

Actual spy picture of @Krugerrand deciding what next to post.


View attachment 670535

Contrast: You all gussied up today.

 

[JRP3]

It could also be they are using 4680s, but less of them due to more favorable power vs energy density.

I'm giving a lot of credibility to the report from Bill Wright that they are using 18650s. Could turn out to be wrong of course.

 

[M|S|M MYP]

Take it with a grain of salt...but.....

@Cherry Wine beat me to it.

 

[dl003]

We as members of this forum are inherently idealistic and hopeful. We choose to believe in TSLA as what it can be, not what it is currently going through. There are upsides and downsides to that but ultimately, we are doing something right collectively. The fact of the matter is Tesla is building the best car in the world and selling it for $120k. Any other person would get their mind blown by this mere fact. Growth is messy and costly. Wall Street does not appreciate that. Discussions are healthy, even the heated ones. But, I hope we can all take a step back and try to understand there is no blueprint to changing the world and Elon is bound to make missteps here and there. It's those missteps that make him who he is. Getting upset is not beneficial to your mental health or your outlook. I see consolidating of Plaid and Plaid+ orders as making more sense than not. I think it will be good for the bottom line and the stock price.

 

[Singuy]

That's what they want you to believe [/tinfoil]

Seriously though... It seems probable that the plaid will be somewhat better than the original specs (maybe range, maybe surprise features, we don't know).

Maybe a lot of plaid+ orders will not be satisfied with the production-release Plaid, but most will still buy the next Tesla that fits their needs. That's ok, they weren't buying until next year anyway. Some number of plaid+ orders will now take plaid sooner. Some folks with LR orders may even jump to plaid if there are better reasons to do so. (I may change from LR to plaid X depending on what happens this week with the Plaid S)

Selling more high-margin cars sooner should be good for the SP... Unless the market is suddenly thinking long term. I call BS.

IMHO - Usual players magnifying controversy and exaggerating the dip for personal gain, and some speculative traders bailing because they had unrealistic expectations (surprise 4680 early-release, etc).

It did seemed probable until Elons clarification calls more range pointless. Also it has been discussed that 4680 is not in the Plaid.

So I am holding out for a surprise range increase to the 450s or something. Just because Elon made an argument that range is not important pass 400 doesn't mean he wouldn't surprise us. But the possibility went from highly likely a range surprise to less than likely after his clarification to electrek.

 

[StarFoxisDown!]

Take it with a grain of salt...but.....

View attachment 670539


@Cherry Wine beat me to it.

At this point, we've had about 4 different sources all say pretty much the same numbers. I think we can lose the grain of salt

 

[kalefranz]

The new Plaid S will have the old form factor batteries. The Plaid + that was intended to have the new form factor and battery as structure is cancelled. For now.

It seems that quite a few of us are conflating the 4680 battery with the structural pack. I think that might be a mistake. The Plaid S could still have the structural pack along with the older form-factor cells.