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

[mongo]

Yeah, not legally on public roads, at least in the USA. The SpaceX collab. could also be in materials science, not just propulsion. 4 plaid motors are already capable of 2,000 hp (Tesla Semi w. 3 can be custom-configured for each customer w. up to 1,500 hp).

Assuming that maintaining traction limits front wheel power to half of the each rear wheel, that's 1,500 hp to the ground. This 0-60 mph calculator says a car w. 1,500 hp will go 0-60 mph in less than a second if it weighs 2,150 lbs. So it's either they've given up the 600 mi range and gone to a light weight battery pack, or its some form of traction aide (aerodynamic, or reaction-mass).

Calculate Estimated 0-60 Times | CarSpecs.US​

If traction ISN'T the limiting factor, and all 2,000 hp can be used, then the car could weigh up to 2,900 lbs. A more reasonable 4,000 lb car would need 2,755 hp which means what, 6 motors?! WTF, nutty combos from here on up. Superconductors? I'm boggled at this point...

So either the battery is lighter, or the only obvious remaining solution:

...ALIEN ANTI-GRAVITY TECHNOLOGY.​

Cheers to the Crazy Ones!

P.S. This 1/4 Mile ET-MPH-HP Calculator says a 2,900 lb car with 2,000 hp can do this:

Your ET / MPH computed from your vehicle weight of 2900 pounds andHP of 2000​

is 6.59 seconds and MPH of 204.98 MPH.​

I just hope they give it enough bty pack capacity to do a full lap of the Nürburgring.

That calculator is based on ICE car data.
From a pure physics point of view (in a vacuum):
If the motors can put 1500 hp to the ground at 60 MPH, let that be the max traction of the tires, and also the max force (constant torque from 0 (which is 0 hp)).
1500hp=1118.55kW=kJ/s=kNm/s
60mph=26.8m/s
1118.55/26.8 = 41.75 kN
f=ma
41.75kN=m*26.8m/s²
m=1.56kkg=3,426 pound car
Verification:
Ke=0.5*1560kg*(26.8m/s)²=560kJ
In one second: 560kJ/s
Assuming constant acceleration and linear power increase:
Power at end: 2*560kJ/s=1120kW
Yep, that matches
Of course, this requires tires with a coefficient of friction of 26.8/9.8 = 2.7, with no rolling resistance...

 

[Todd Burch]

This is an example of how Tesla gets marketing done while spending hardly any money. Beaucoups of coverage tomorrow and through the week

You French, bro?

 

[heltok]

That calculator is based on ICE car data.
From a pure physics point of view (in a vacuum):
If the motors can put 1500 hp to the ground at 60 MPH, let that be the max traction of the tires, and also the max force (constant torque from 0 (which is 0 hp)).
1500hp=1118.55kW=kJ/s=kNm/s
60mph=26.8m/s
1118.55/26.8 = 41.75 kN
f=ma
41.75kN=m*26.8m/s²
m=1.56kkg=3,426 pound car
Verification:
Ke=0.5*1560kg*(26.8m/s)²=560kJ
In one second: 560kJ/s
Assuming constant acceleration and linear power increase:
Power at end: 2*560kJ/s=1120kW
Yep, that matches
Of course, this requires tires with a coefficient of friction of 26.8/9.8 = 2.7, with no rolling resistance...

It's been a while since I studied mechanical engineering, but iirc you have to include like 10% rotational energy in the wheels and similar to air and ground. This is what ChatGPT says:

Spoiler: ChatGPT

Assumptions for Simplification:​

1. Vehicle Parameters: Average passenger car with a drag coefficient (CdCd) around 0.3, frontal area (AA) approximately 2.2 square meters, and a mass (mm) of about 1500 kg. We'll assume typical values for the coefficient of rolling resistance (CrrCrr) around 0.015 and use standard air density (ρρ) of 1.225 kg/m³.
2. Speed and Acceleration: Acceleration to 60 mph (approximately 27 m/s) without specifying the time it takes allows us to ignore the specific dynamics of the acceleration curve.
3. Efficiency and Losses: We acknowledge that internal combustion engines and electric motors have different efficiencies and loss distributions, but we'll focus on the mechanical energy distribution.

Energy Distribution Estimation:​

• Translational (Kinetic) Energy: The bulk of the propulsive energy goes into accelerating the car's mass. For a rough approximation, we might allocate 70-80% of the energy to overcoming inertia and achieving the final speed.
• Rotational Energy: Energy needed to accelerate the rotating parts (wheels, driveshaft) is significant but much less than the translational energy. A rough estimate might be 5-10% of the total energy, depending on the vehicle's specific characteristics.
• Air Resistance Loss: The energy lost to air resistance increases with the cube of the speed, making it a significant factor at higher speeds. However, for the entire acceleration phase up to 60 mph, this might account for 10-15% of the total energy, with the percentage increasing at higher speeds.
• Rolling Resistance Loss: Energy lost to rolling resistance is relatively constant and depends more on the distance traveled than the speed. For acceleration to 60 mph, let's estimate this at 5-10%.

Summary of Approximate Energy Distribution:​

• Translational (Kinetic) Energy: 70-80%
• Rotational Energy: 5-10%
• Air Resistance Loss: 10-15%
• Rolling Resistance Loss: 5-10%

 

[Buckminster]

My assumption was that the cold thrusters would be directed backwards to do this rather than upwards. We know that they need to be directed downwards to "fly". I think it is likely that they will be directed outwards for cornering.

As a reminder:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1005577738332172289

The only spec change could be to the performance of the thrusters.

 

[jeewee3000]

Regarding Roadster 2.0 I'm thinking maybe they have four rear wheels (two wheels side by side on the left-rear, and two wheels side by side on the right-rear of the car), to greatly increase friction.

Yes, you get more rolling resistance, but if the car is very light only four wheels is not a lot to keep it from sliding.

The whole thruster thing is probably more accurate, but I fail to see how that will be legal on public roads.

 

[Buckminster]

Regarding Roadster 2.0 I'm thinking maybe they have four rear wheels (two wheels side by side on the left-rear, and two wheels side by side on the right-rear of the car), to greatly increase friction.

Yes, you get more rolling resistance, but if the car is very light only four wheels is not a lot to keep it from sliding.

The whole thruster thing is probably more accurate, but I fail to see how that will be legal on public roads.

I don't see thrusters being legal on public roads. Track cars are a thing which folk spend even more on. I'm not even sure thrusters will be legal on a track with other cars using it.

 

[mongo]

Regarding Roadster 2.0 I'm thinking maybe they have four rear wheels (two wheels side by side on the left-rear, and two wheels side by side on the right-rear of the car), to greatly increase friction.

Yes, you get more rolling resistance, but if the car is very light only four wheels is not a lot to keep it from sliding.

The whole thruster thing is probably more accurate, but I fail to see how that will be legal on public roads.

That would not increase friction much because the downforce would be divided amongst the tires.
Only gain would be due to a shift in the rubber's coefficient of friction which is dependent on loading.

 

[FEERSUMENDJIN]

All the cool kids are talking about the new BYD and the potential model 2, but not enough people are talking about Vans, Taxis and Semi Trucks. When it comes to reducing emissions, its worth focusing on the vehicles that are in constant use. I don't even do 10,000 miles a year, and me swapping from ICE to EV is great, but its a rounding error compared to a taxi driver or someone doing deliveries all day or long haul trucking.

I think its good that Tesla launched the Cybertruck, because they are (weirdly) so popular in their home country, and home state, but in the wider world, Tesla needs to get semi production up and running at scale, and for-the-love-of-god can we get a Tesla van?
Vans are mostly utilitarian, used for work everywhere in Europe where US users would have a pickup. We badly need an affordable, reliable and popular electric van. GigaBerlin would be the perfect place. Europe loves vans! and if the model Y is not enough to fill up GigaBerlin, lets get some vans made!

The bot, FSD, Dojo are all cool. I'd love to see some cybertrucks in Europe, and obviously I'm keen to see the model 2 reveal. But what I REALLY want to see as an investor is Tesla reveal their Tesla Van, or the first mass-production semi's roll off the line. Do we think the semi line will be producing vehicles this year? It feels like Tesla should be building a semi factory/line in China and Europe at the same time. Its not like they are short of capital.

It drives me nuts that Tesla doesn't allow for a stripped 1 or 2 seat cargo version of anything for small delivery vehicles for florists, auto parts stores, caterers, mail carriers, or for camping. Many times I curse the un-removeable nature of my Model X rear seats when I want to move a lot of stuff.

I'm thinking Tesla tries to stagger building out each new factory or production line with updates and improvements so that each one stands on the shoulders of the previous machine-that-builds-the-machine. Build three Semi factories on three continents all at once, and they will be identical; but Tesla's mission requires optimizing for and improving on the machine-that-builds-the-machine, not just to speed products to production.

The Mobile Ranger in our part of Scotland has a model Y fitted out in the back (I think the seats were removed or just permanently down) That is a great wee van.

 

[Ellec]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1762835443052118458

New factory in Southern Europe perhaps?

 

[FreqFlyer]

I bet open box production lends itself to building low volume niche vehicles like the Roadster.

Question is what platform or is it bespoke?
Is it a version of Gen 3 (would require incredible rigidity platform)?
Will the bespoke platform be shared (Model S)?

 

[hobbes]

Cool new video summarizing the 7 manufacturing plants.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1762252399429796291

Hm interesting, it says Giga Berlin "Manufactures Model Y & batteries", showing a empty cell can (at 0:57).

Mistake (video produces mixed up battery pack and cell production) or are they producing cells after all?
I was thinking they moved all the cell production equipment to Texas because of IRA incentives, but that
was a while ago.

 

[Hock1]

Even if the retooling is enough to significantly extend their runway I'd expect it to be positive for the stock. If they can reduce losses to a point where cash on hand will last (e.g.) 5 years instead of the c.2 years at the current burn rate it buys Rivian a lot of time to get better.

They have to move faster..

 

[GhostSkater]

That would not increase friction much because the downforce would be divided amongst the tires.
Only gain would be due to a shift in the rubber's coefficient of friction which is dependent on loading.

While I agree that 4 rear wheels makes no sense, tire friction is more complex than weight vs friction coefficient. What I mean is that friction coefficient isn't linear with contact patch area and usually increase with area

If you have the same weight and same tires on two wheels vs four wheels, the latter will have more grip

 

[FreqFlyer]

Would not be surprised if the Roadster list price approaches or is above a million dollars.

Now what to do about all the free Roadsters "earned" or the freebees.

 

[Cult Member]

Would not be surprised if the Roadster list price approaches or is above a million dollars.

Now what to do about all the free Roadsters "earned" or the freebees.

Compare the specs to the McLaren F1 Musk bought for 1 million $ in the 90ies. McLaren sold 64 road versions of this car. It took them 3 1/2 months to make one. How many Roadsters does the world need?

 

[Joe F]

I don't see thrusters being legal on public roads. Track cars are a thing which folk spend even more on. I'm not even sure thrusters will be legal on a track with other cars using it.

ICE cars suck. The Roadster blows.

 

[SOULPEDL]

Would not be surprised if the Roadster list price approaches or is above a million dollars.

At one time I considered a Founder's Series Roadster for $250K years ago, $50K deposit. So I can't imagine it's over 4X now, plus cost savings on motors and batteries etc... Maybe the price could even hold.

 

[Discoducky]

Without me having to research, are those tests comparable? As we know some of the NHTSA testing is not the same as the IIHS testing.

Yep, they all test about the same stuff and they all communicate with each other when they make changes. C-NCAP is also very closely tied with Euro NCAP as the name suggests.

 

[FreqFlyer]

My guess, the Roadster debut will be part of the Gen 3 car debut as the "one more thing".

 

[aubreymcfato]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1762835443052118458

New factory in Southern Europe perhaps?

I'll believe when I see it.
A small factory/research team is more likely. Or even a megapacktory, why not. Or, bear with me, a Roadster factory for Europe in the Motor Valley (the talent for luxury cars is definitely present).
Not a proper GigaFactory, IMHO.