The S/X rear AC motors do not spin freely; the controller is set to "torque sleep". This zero net thrust mode has lower losses than the drag of an unpowered axle pulled by a powered axle. In torque sleep, most work is done by the more efficient front motor. The Roadster2 likely won't have a AC motor in the front. It achieves both a 1.9 sec 0-60 performance and a 250+ mph top speed. AC motors don't allow this range of performance with a single speed drive. Further, we saw the Roadster do 0-70mph 'wind-sprints' for an hour at the reveal event. An AC motor would melt doing this demonstration. The simpliest explanation for all these capabilities is that there are three Model 3 SRPM motors in the Roadster2. Since this tri-motor design already exists in the Roadster, Tesla can use that design for the Cyberpunk truck and the eventual new S/X platform. There is no need for a large rear AC motor which are replaced by two SRPM motors on that axle. That's over 760 hp, which is more than the performance AC motor but at lower cost, higher efficiency and better performance. This is also why talk of an imminent S/X 'refresh' is baseless, The halo product has to come first, and it sounds like the Roadster is not planned for 2020, which will be the year of the Model Y then the Semi. The Cyberpuck truck may also beat Roadster to the gate. I expect to hear more plans during the reveal later this Summer. It will be years before the tri-motor architecture appears in the S/X. I predict sub-10 sec quarter miles, a 300+ kph top speed, and a 500 mile range on a 125 KWh Maxcell pack to be released around 2023. Prices should be comparable to current levels. Beyond this, my crystal ball grows dim. But I know Tesla will always be at the intersection of science and technology. It's their unique art. Cheers!
@capster, what do you believe Elon means by feature complete? What percentage of “tricks” of the human brain should the NN be able to master for full autonomy... or even, for the enhanced summon (since that’s also unsupervised)?
While he, and you, are right in principle you're missing the actual point of my observation: a short position has an infinite potential loss, a long position can only ever go to $0. If short interest has increased as the price of TSLA has fallen then - on the whole - it means the shorts are positioning themselves for a continued drop in stock price. Now, if short interest had in fact been falling during the drop that would be bad indeed for those of us playing the long long game - it would mean shorts were unwinding their positions as the stock price fell taking their profits, but in stead it would seem they've doubled down on their bet creating the spring effect I was imagining. You see, in the same way the short sellers as a whole haven't profited $4,5 Bn (because they haven't exited their postions, on a whole) I haven't "lost" a cent yet compared to last year's highs because I haven't sold a single share…
I do not think it was intentional. Panasonic screwed up big time, yes. It appears to have been a conflict between the Japanese and Amercian corporate cultures, which led to "hiding problems under the rug" until they became to big to ignore.
My wife, for fun, has been an extra in several movies that were filming in metro Atlanta. Several times, she has gotten a gig because they were looking for a Model S. Doesn’t pay much but it’s a fun experience.
There is really a massive amount of nickel available, including in mines which are "mothballed" and even extraction from recycling. It's really easy to ramp up compared to lithium or cobalt, is what I'm saying.
This is my only long-term worry about the company. If they get out of communications hell, they'll find themselves in heaven.
No, in your previous post, you sarcastically downplayed ARK's most recent Tesla buy: My response was simply that this represents a continuation of ARK's recent Tesla buying streak. Not everyone here is reading every post.
I'd reply something like this: Russ, you are a JOURNALIST, Tesla's Autonomy Day was a 4 hour long presentation with a lot of ad-hoc moments. It is your JOB to report the truth, to examine the full context and to not come to nonsensical conclusions, and it's your JOB to ask for clarification if there's any ambiguity. It is your JOB not to report falsehoods, and it is also your job to inform your readers if a particular (mis-)statement by Elon Musk is in direct contradiction with what he said just seconds before... Please correct your misleading article that quotes Elon Musk out of context. Maybe also ask him whether the editorial board of the LA Times considers it proper, ethical and legal to write misleading articles about Tesla, who happens to be in direct competition with "NantEnergy", a zinc-air startup owned by Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, the current owner of the LA Times: I'd not expect any substantial replies though.
One more thing I will Good Point - make it whatever the lowest price available on the website is. $39,900? Or, don't even put the starting price. Only reason I mentioned that is because another thing most people ask me is, "Don't those things cost about a hundred grand?". All are shocked when I say they start around $37,000 (or whatever).
Oh, he's a moron. To be more fair, he's overspecialized. Sure, Tesla has communications problems, but so what? That's not a business analysis. His problem is that he is a professor of marketing, so all he can see is the marketing. Tesla's marketing is certainly abysmal, but what Mr. Galloway is missing is any ability to analyze the actual business. A business with terrible marketing which still has people lining up out the door to buy their product... should wake him up and make him realize that there's something else going on, but he's too specialized. He thinks a business is nothing BUT marketing, and ignores the products, ignores the consumer desires, etc.
The AC motor, when active, continually wastes power in the rotor. The PMSR is much higher on the efficiency curve in cruise than the AC at near idle is. So it is more efficient to drive the gearing and rotor with the front motor than to drive the rear motor electrically. See also @wk057's investigation showing the motors turn off: Let the hacking begin... (Model S parts on the bench) I doubt it will be AC also, but an AC motor can produce those performance numbers. Current S top speed is 155 MPH. To keep the same rotor speed, they need to up the gear ratio 60% which means for the same wheel torque, they need to boost current 60% also (or change the windings) . An upsized AC motor can give whatever power performance you need (at least till the rotor overheats)
Great you know how it works. How fast after advertising does the effect kick in? Do you believe Elon is lying and demand is an issue? Why not wait until demand is an issue then advertise? (because I do believe it works) Will people believe the advertising against the FUD now but not later? (that just sounds crazy) Company's do not advertise to raise their stock price.
Now, I've had a couple of scotches so far this evening, so excuse me if this is a little stream-of-consciousness. But. When I read a post like the one above I get kind of excited for the next few years. I don't own a Tesla (just the stock), and I've never even driven one. I have a 2006 civic with lots of peeling paint and janky wheels. But the second that mythical short squeeze happens, the second purchase I make after buying a Souris River Quetico 17 canoe is going to be a Model 3. The fact that so few people know so little about this company and the products it makes - like the folks you're talking about in your post - leaves me a little gobsmacked at how much room there is to run. I have no idea what to think about this advertising situation - I'm no expert. I read a post from someone advocating one position and I think, "Yeah, that makes sense, Tesla should do the rational thing and run some targeted internet ads." And then I read another post from @Krugerrand and think, "Down with the propaganda! We shall not manufacture consent!" (apologies for the dramatization). I just like to imagine what I see as an inevitable future where Teslas are the cool cars that people aspire to have. All they have to do is stay afloat till Gen Z has the means to start buying cars. Then it's game over. Time for some Letterkenny.
Agree, agree, agree Tesla has a stronger board than most companies I've invested in. Most corporate boards are sinecures -- look at ExxonMobil or Berkshire Hathaway. Mr. Galloway doesn't understand buisness. He's a professor of marketing. That's because he doesn't understand any sort of business at all. All he understands is marketing.
Agreed. The mind boggles why they are not taking profits, especially when it was at 175. Do they ALL think it is going to zero?! Their risk appetite seems incredibly high. Can anyone explain why Ihor thinks it is so unlikely?
I didn’t make the connection earlier that the NYU professor frequently quoted in clickbait media and this Kara Swisher co-host dude are the same guy. Maybe he is just pissed that Kara gets all the limelight and he is (relatively speaking) just a random dude that nobody recognised .. actually, that explains everything
My mother-in-law recently went into a Tesla showroom and was told by a store associate that the Model 3 starts at $57,000. Even Tesla salespeople seem to be confused on that point.
I'm pretty sure it'll be lithium, partly because there has been a bizarre failure of financial funding to miners to ramp up lithium production. I don't see this for other mining situations. Some of the other raw materials bottlenecks would be classified as processing, not mining. (There's not that much synthetic graphite manufactured, but there's plenty of petcoke to make it from; there may not be that much nickel sulfide, but there's plenty of nickel to make it from).
You could in fact take most of them on simultaneously with attack ads about gasoline cars catching on fire all the time, like they do. Just a thought, not necessarily a good idea.