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

[RobStark]

 

[WADan]

View attachment 737134

Lack of originality, lack of engineering talent…

 

[kbM3]

Seems there are two ways to match Tesla on efficiency. One is a decade of constant tweaking and refinement using the finest engineering. The other is to cheat…

I think Warren got it wrong.

1. EPA references efficiency directly. That mpge rating will tell us how Lucid does in efficiency. We should not jump to the conclusion that Lucid is lying to the EPA or cheating the test.

2. 134 kWh is what was drawn from the charger. Some of that might even go to run cabin climate, and definitely some is lost through charger inefficiency. 13.5% seems kind of high, but Warren’s claim of a single Model 3 test is absurdly low.

 

[StealthP3D]

This makes me anxious for what comes out of Texas. The 4680 cells and single casting front end should drop at least 300-500 pounds more.

They over-emphasized that the extra quickness of the Model Y was due to it being lighter. The fact is, the Model Y just puts down more power over the run. And they kept giving the jump off the line to Mach-e to make it more even than it really was. Edmunds gave every advantage they could to the Ford and the Tesla still stomped on it. They had no choice but to call the Tesla the winner. The Model Y would have won even if they added weights to make them the same weight. I determined this by using an online HP calculator based on both the 1/4-mile ET and also the 1/4-mile top speed and the listed vehicle weights plus 200 lbs. for driver and gear.

The fact that the Model Y puts out more HP with a much smaller battery shows Tesla's technological superiority. But, yeah, shaving 300 lbs off the Model Y with 4680 structural pack and F&R castings is probably in the ballpark and will make it slightly quicker yet. About 1/4 second in the 1/4-mile.

 

[thesmokingman]

They over-emphasized that the extra quickness of the Model Y was due to it being lighter. The fact is, the Model Y just puts down more power over the run. And they kept giving the jump off the line to Mach-e to make it more even than it really was. Edmunds gave every advantage they could to the Ford and the Tesla still stomped on it. They had no choice but to call the Tesla the winner. The Model Y would have won even if they added weights to make them the same weight. I determined this by using an online HP calculator based on both the 1/4-mile ET and also the 1/4-mile top speed and the listed vehicle weights plus 200 lbs. for driver and gear.

The fact that the Model Y puts out more HP with a much smaller battery shows Tesla's technological superiority. But, yeah, shaving 300 lbs off the Model Y with 4680 structural pack and F&R castings is probably in the ballpark and will make it slightly quicker yet. About 1/4 second in the 1/4-mile.

Their MYP has spent over a year of being launched over and over and over...

It's hilarious that they keep failing to mention that.

 

[Artful Dodger]

Here are 10 more reasons to be Thankful for TSLA this year: (are you in the top-ten?)

Jeopardy Highest Regular-Season Winnings​

1. Ken Jennings | $2,520,700
2. James Holzhauer | $2,462,216
3. Matt Amodio | $574,801
4. Jason Zuffranieri | $532,496
5. David Madden | $430,400
6. Julia Collins | $428,100
7. Matt Jackson | $411,612
8. Austin Rogers | $411,000
9. Arthur Chu | $297,200
10. Seth Wilson | $265,002

Happy Thanksgiving to all my American cousins.



Cheers!

 

[MC3OZ]

I think Warren got it wrong.

1. EPA references efficiency directly. That mpge rating will tell us how Lucid does in efficiency. We should not jump to the conclusion that Lucid is lying to the EPA or cheating the test.

2. 134 kWh is what was drawn from the charger. Some of that might even go to run cabin climate, and definitely some is lost through charger inefficiency. 13.5% seems kind of high, but Warren’s claim of a single Model 3 test is absurdly low.

It always seemed to me Lucid had 2 big advantages:-
1) Higher voltage
2) Thinner body - reduced drag

Both of these advantages some with some trade-offs but should lead to:-

3) Reduced weight.

So I think what a Lucid weighs compared to a Model S is a telling statistic, I have little doubt the Model S has significantly more cabin space.
But Lucid may have an elegant design, which overcomes the thinner body.

I hope Lucid respond to Warren, if the cabin climate really used a few percent of the electricity when charging, that may indicate the cabin climate system is inefficient. All those electrons had to go somewhere, and we should be able to compare kerb weights.

Not that the Lucid is necessarily a bad car, just that claiming to be more efficient than Tesla is a high standard to uphold.

 

[ZeApelido]

Great thread on big improvements to Tesla’s depth prediction from cameras. Big changes in 10.5.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1463628670208147460

 

[StealthP3D]

I think Warren got it wrong.

1. EPA references efficiency directly. That mpge rating will tell us how Lucid does in efficiency. We should not jump to the conclusion that Lucid is lying to the EPA or cheating the test.

2. 134 kWh is what was drawn from the charger. Some of that might even go to run cabin climate, and definitely some is lost through charger inefficiency. 13.5% seems kind of high, but Warren’s claim of a single Model 3 test is absurdly low.

No, Warren's estimate of fast DC charging efficiency losses is not absurdly low. Charging li-ion batteries with dc current is extremely efficient with very little loss. You can read about coulombic efficiency here:

BU-808c: Coulombic and Energy Efficiency with the Battery

BU meta description needed...

batteryuniversity.com

Coulombic efficiency (CE), also called faradaic efficiency or current efficiency, describes the charge efficiency by which electrons are transferred in batteries. CE is the ratio of the total charge extracted from the battery to the total charge put into the battery over a full cycle.

Li-ion has one of the highest CE ratings in rechargeable batteries. It offers an efficiency that exceeds 99 percent. This, however, is only possible when charged at a moderate current and at cool temperatures. Ultra-fast charging lowers the CE because of losses due to charge acceptance and heat, so also does a very slow charge in which self-discharge comes into play(See BU-808b: What Causes Li-ion to Die)

The coulombic efficiency of Li-ion improves with cycling. To prove this, Panasonic, E-one Moli, Sony, LG and Samsung Li-ion batteries in 18650 cell format where cycled. Some cells began with a coulombic efficiency of 99.1 percent and improved to 99.5 percent with 15 cycles. Some started at 99.5 percent and reached 99.9 percent with 30 cycles. The consistency on repeat tests was high, reflecting in Li-ion being a very stable battery system.

Almost all of the approx. 10-15% charging loss in A/C charging is in the AC/DC conversion. There is no doubt the available energy of the Lucid battery is more than claimed and it's likely the 520-mile EPA combined range has also been slightly gamed. A little fudge here, a little fudge there and Lucid can claim technological superiority and this is very good for the value of shares as insiders sell.

 

[MP3Mike]

It always seemed to me Lucid had 2 big advantages:-
1) Higher voltage
2) Thinner body - reduced drag

Both of these advantages some with some trade-offs but should lead to:-

3) Reduced weight.

They should, but the only weight of the Lucid I could find, 2150kg, means that it only weighs 27 pounds less than a Model S. So something in there is very heavy.

 

[StealthP3D]

View attachment 737134

Isn't "the Blue Oval" supposed to be positioned in landscape orientation? They wanted so much to be a little more like Tesla they even converted their Blue Oval from landscape to portrait mode. But they forgot to use it to keep the charge cord neatly stowed inside the oval. It looks a lot like a gas pump but I think it's going to take a long time to charge an F-150 Lightning with such a skinny little cord, it couldn't be much thicker than my thumb!

 

[Accident]

I think Warren got it wrong.

1. EPA references efficiency directly. That mpge rating will tell us how Lucid does in efficiency. We should not jump to the conclusion that Lucid is lying to the EPA or cheating the test.

2. 134 kWh is what was drawn from the charger. Some of that might even go to run cabin climate, and definitely some is lost through charger inefficiency. 13.5% seems kind of high, but Warren’s claim of a single Model 3 test is absurdly low.

The Lucid is probably running at a maximum thermal cooling mode to keep that charging rate. The charging session was 82 minutes, so there’s a few kWh used there.

 

[StealthP3D]

Here are 10 more reasons to be Thankful for TSLA this year: (are you in the top-ten?)

Jeopardy Highest Regular-Season Winnings​

1. Ken Jennings | $2,520,700
2. James Holzhauer | $2,462,216
3. Matt Amodio | $574,801
4. Jason Zuffranieri | $532,496
5. David Madden | $430,400
6. Julia Collins | $428,100
7. Matt Jackson | $411,612
8. Austin Rogers | $411,000
9. Arthur Chu | $297,200
10. Seth Wilson | $265,002

Happy Thanksgiving to all my American cousins.

View attachment 737141

Cheers!

Well, when you put it that way, I guess I'm a lot smarter than I thought I was!

 

[SPadival]

Primetime FUD in the UK this evening...

BBC One - Panorama, The Electric Car Revolution: Winners and Losers

How ethical is Tesla's supply chain? Darragh MacIntyre investigates.

www.bbc.co.uk

What a load of uninformed rubbish. Basically blaming Tesla for all sorts... including trespassing miners being injured because they scaled Glencore's security fences! Complete hit-job saying Tesla is at the heart of all the issues with Cobalt etc.

Unbelievable that this was able to make it on to the BBC.

BBC gets a lot of funding from Billy Boi Gates foundation. As we all know, Billy Boi is $TSLAQ

 

[Ogre]

They over-emphasized that the extra quickness of the Model Y was due to it being lighter. The fact is, the Model Y just puts down more power over the run. And they kept giving the jump off the line to Mach-e to make it more even than it really was. Edmunds gave every advantage they could to the Ford and the Tesla still stomped on it. They had no choice but to call the Tesla the winner. The Model Y would have won even if they added weights to make them the same weight. I determined this by using an online HP calculator based on both the 1/4-mile ET and also the 1/4-mile top speed and the listed vehicle weights plus 200 lbs. for driver and gear.

The fact that the Model Y puts out more HP with a much smaller battery shows Tesla's technological superiority. But, yeah, shaving 300 lbs off the Model Y with 4680 structural pack and F&R castings is probably in the ballpark and will make it slightly quicker yet. About 1/4 second in the 1/4-mile.

Shaving an additional 300-500 pounds off the Model Y is going to make it quicker regardless.

The one thing that cracked me up is the Ford guy going off on how he needed to put his car into a special mode, then the Tesla guy talking about making sure his car is in standard accelleration mode… which most of us are in 100% of the time regardless.

 

[Ogre]

I think Warren got it wrong.

1. EPA references efficiency directly. That mpge rating will tell us how Lucid does in efficiency. We should not jump to the conclusion that Lucid is lying to the EPA or cheating the test.

2. 134 kWh is what was drawn from the charger. Some of that might even go to run cabin climate, and definitely some is lost through charger inefficiency. 13.5% seems kind of high, but Warren’s claim of a single Model 3 test is absurdly low.

It is entirely aside from the point as far as I’m concerned. If your car is 10% less efficient at the charging station or on the road, it amounts to the same thing.

 

[SPadival]

I think Warren got it wrong.

1. EPA references efficiency directly. That mpge rating will tell us how Lucid does in efficiency. We should not jump to the conclusion that Lucid is lying to the EPA or cheating the test.

2. 134 kWh is what was drawn from the charger. Some of that might even go to run cabin climate, and definitely some is lost through charger inefficiency. 13.5% seems kind of high, but Warren’s claim of a single Model 3 test is absurdly low.

Warren is someone who said that Lucid will not start production this year. They did

He also gave Tesla a $157 trillion valuation by 2030, which would make me a billionaire

 

[Bet TSLA]

It is entirely aside from the point as far as I’m concerned. If your car is 10% less efficient at the charging station or on the road, it amounts to the same thing.

Ummm, what?

So I buy an EV. Then over time it loses efficiency. One possibility is that it's less efficient at charging. That would mean it costs me 10% more in electricity, which may or may not translate to dollars and/or time charging. Another possibility is that it loses 10% of its efficiency on the road. In that case it loses 10% of its range.

You may hold that it's arguable which situation is worse, but in no way does it amount to the same thing. I much prefer the former.

 

[SOULPEDL]

Got it finally with a 99 score! Remote camera works too. Found some tricky spots and plan to use as reference. Discovered I tend to stare at the monitor to long.

 

[RobStark]

Yes Rob, I get it. But what you might not get is Elon wants to be at the top. You know, the whole mission thing. #TimeWillTell

I fully get Elon wants to be on top.

All CEOs want to be on top.

You, know the whole $$$ & Ego thing.

There are just realities that get in the way sometimes.

The day after Lucid announced 517 Elon announced 520.

Accomplishing The Mission doesn't mean you must win every battle on all fronts all the time.

Edited for syntax