Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Azoreans"KarenRei, post: 3369451, member: 62825"]Speaking of ships, any clue why the Glovis Captain has basically been vacationing in the waters around the Azores recently? Fishing stop? ;)
I'm from São Miguel Island spent the first 9 months of my life there :) have been back on occasion. Maybe a few model 3's were ordered by Azoreans :p
Can’t find the source. But I saw something on Twitter mentioning something about a weather holds. New estimated arrival date of Feb5
 
  • Informative
Reactions: AZRI11
OT

Possible guesses:
  • Aerodynamic efficiency
  • Weight : another efficiency tradeoff
  • Cost to manufacture
  • Engineering cost

The delay on the Y is related to the impact of frontal area on battery pack size and how much cost difference shows up when comparing EVs to ICE vehicles. You see it in SUV offerings from other manufacturers.

This aerodynamic drag math might help:

Drag Force = constant * V * V * (Drag coefficient) * (Frontal Area)

Power = force * velocity, so multiply the equation above by V one more time.

The frontal area of compact SUVs is significantly larger than the frontal area of a Model 3. The battery pack needs to increase in size and cost as the frontal area gets larger. If the shape is less slippery the coefficient of drag gets larger, too. This makes for even more power consumption when driving at highway speeds.

EVs will not compare as well to ICE vehicles when battery requirements are disproportionately large.
 
Given the rough guidance that Y will be 50% higher demand than 3, I don't see having stamping located at Fremont as bring viable capacity wise. I'm also doubtful of shipping ecomics for stamped pieces, seems like the space utilization of racked parts in the trailer might result in empty trucks from GF1 to Fremont.

I'm also guessing they've had the long lead equipment on order for a while. And having independent stamping lines is good from a what-if-something-breaks point of view.

OK, I can see that, but maybe most Model Ys will be made closer to the point of delivery so the GF1 volume will be lower than Fremont. (China/EU)

The other option is that they will just do that for the initial ramp while they are waiting for new stamping machines to be produced and installed. As far as shipping economics I think the battery packs take way more space than neatly nestled panels, so I don't think that would be a problem at all.
 
If in December someone would say that Tesla is @7k production, that person would receive 20 likes, 15 loves etc. and those who questioned that they are close to that number sustained would get a bunch of disagrees. I'm sure there are tons of posts like that if we go back.

So, when Elon says we're far from 7k and the response is "how can that be confusing to anyone"... Well, I think this is in line with Bloomberg's approach of massaging their delivery numbers and is not honest.

I did hear the message that the are working on costs and the reason is obvious - $35k car.
It did not get across so clearly to me that the preparation for recession is the reason for keeping production numbers down.

If you have the quote, I'm happy to re-read it.

Btw, when I questioned the "tiny profit" there were many unproductive responses too and I believe I stated myself first the 2 reasons that Elon mentioned - in-transit cars & restructuring costs.

@ReflexFunds had interesting points too, which Elon did not speak of.

So...while your answer is applicable, it doesn't look like the primary reason. Surely they can ramp down in a recession if there's a need to do that, but given 500k recession demand estimate, Freemont would not be at that level yet.
I'll wait to see if somebody comes up with a better explanation.

They specifically connected the dots between managing money judiciously and preparation for a recession.

They’ve spoken in the past about weekly capacity vs spending to get to 10k/wk out of Fremont. They specifically said they could get to 7k/wk without having to spend a whole lot more money but to 10k/wk meant a much bigger cash layout.

They specifically connected the dots between managing money judiciously and preparation for a recession.

They’ve decided to take their time getting to that 7k/wk thus allowing spreading of the capex throughout the year, probably to help make sure they stay FCF positive from here on out - as they obviously have other capex this year.
 
Can someone enlighten me on why Tesla choose to do model 3 (sedan) before model Y (SUV)?

I kinda understand model S before model X in early days of Tesla, because sedan is lower cost and easier to build etc help the EV adoption. But why model 3 before model Y? I think model Y should be build first.

Can't speak for Europe, but I believe in US and China, SUV is a bigger market and higher growth than sedan. In fact, most EV startups in China such as NIO choose to launch their first car is an SUV.

This really puzzled me quite some time. Your thoughts on this is greatly appreciated!
Simple, efficiency and range.
If we use S vs. X as the rough gauge, with the same battery, Model Y will have 273 miles of range, which makes it less desirable.
To make it have the same 310 range it at least need to have 85kwh battery, which I guess Tesla will do, in-turn jack up the price a bit.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: humbaba and PANN
Now that the SEC is operational again it has posted both halves of December's and the first half of January's fails-to-deliver data. Tesla once again is mysteriously absent in all three files. The same anomaly appeared throughout November. It is completely implausible that there were no failures to deliver Tesla stock at settlement on any day in November, December and the first half of January. This raises the question: what has happened at NSCC and why isn't FINRA (or better yet, the SEC) doing anything about it?
 
Long Range Rear Wheel Drive Model 3 can be ordered in China. Delivery in March.
600+ km range

1C4B47C0-4146-48D5-8780-22AD1EFDA89C.jpeg
A1855C30-9BED-400A-9166-97A7162728D8.jpeg
 
Just to be clear, the storage by itself generates considerable income through grid services. The use of renewables without storage is a trifle illogical, but storage without renewables still allow the batteries to absorb excessive power at lulls and give it back at peaks. It is that process that Hornsdale so profitable, although it was planned to serve as a stabilizing force for the intermittent production at the adjacent wind farm. Almost every was shocked to discover how lucrative the batteries could be. 'almost' because JB had discussed this very issue the first time I heard him, IIRC around 2010. At the time people thought he was smoking something that was then illegal in California.

Sorry if my post wasn't clear this was my implied point. The savings from avoiding utility peak rates, in many locations, will be huge. Capital Tesla invests to add storage to SC locations will be recovered from savings far more quickly than adding PV panels to generate some or all of the power needed. Which is not to suggest that PV solar isn't cost effective or highly desirable. It should just be financed and run by other companies for a number of years, while Tesla can better use it's capital to bring new products and open new markets.
 
Many thanks to people who answered my question on why model 3 before model Y. I love this forum.

Another question in my mind for quite some time, why model X's market share in large luxury SUV is NOT as high as model S's market share in large luxury sedan?

Appreciate your thoughts. Thanks in advance!
Model X is $100K vs other luxury SUV at $75K-ish.
 
Can someone explain this model X and S refresh business? IMO the small and for the better changes they have made over the years kept it fresh.

I’ve wanted the Model S since they came out in 2012. It was just this past year I could afford one and it was just as awesome as 2012. I drive it every day and still think the car is driving the future.

Just because other manufactures have to change the body style every 6 years, doesn’t mean Tesla needs to. They already do their own thing compared to the other car company’s and it has served them well as we see with each ER.

I think some people forget that Tesla was out of range for most folks until recently. So just because folks here in the forums have seen the same Model S since 2012 and are bored of it, doesn’t mean the vast majority of folks have.

Our 2015 Model S feels so old and out of date. 2018/2019 models so much better and different.

Totally agree. A very visual refresh here or there can be nice, but no need anytime soon, imho.
 
Speaking of ships, any clue why the Glovis Captain has basically been vacationing in the waters around the Azores recently? Fishing stop? ;)

Azoreans
I'm from São Miguel Island spent the first 9 months of my life there :) have been back on occasion. Maybe a few model 3's were ordered by Azoreans :p

Can’t find the source. But I saw something on Twitter mentioning something about a weather holds. New estimated arrival date of Feb5

Here's your answer ;););)

Autopilot mistook the exit for a lane...
 
Many thanks to people who answered my question on why model 3 before model Y. I love this forum.

Another question in my mind for quite some time, why model X's market share in large luxury SUV is NOT as high as model S's market share in large luxury sedan?

Appreciate your thoughts. Thanks in advance!
Tesla currently only has the capacity to make about 50K Model X a year, so sales number is kind of fixed.
Meanwhile SUVs are much more popular than sedans, so total SUV sales number is much bigger, this Model X’s smaller market share than Model S’s.
In short, they are in different market segments.